Role of HRM in Modern Organizations and Dilemmas - Essay Example

Role of HRM in modern organizations and dilemmas Introduction Experience based learning (EBL) is a learning method that emphasizes on creating knowledge through transformation method of experience (Ram 1995). According to Kolb’s experimental learning theory, four elements that are concrete experience, reflective observations, conceptualization and active experimentation are involved in EBL. I conducted an interactive workshop that included role playing, simulations and discussions on employee grievances and disciplinary procedures in the workplace. The interactive workshop on disciplinary and grievance handling procedures enabled me increase my skills and knowledge of the topic. As a learner at level 6, the interactive workshop has helped me reflect on theories leaned in class and link them to practical experiences in the workplace. The interactive workshop was an effective learning method since it included role playing, case analysis and simulations together with brainstorming sessions. The interactive workshop has helped me develop effective interpersonal and communication skills (Ram 1995). The interactive workshop enhanced my communication and relations skills hence I am able to interact well and work in harmony with peers in the workplace (Ram 1995). I was assigned the interactive workshop in order to get a practical view of disciplinary and grievance handling procedures in the workplace. I formed a group of six students that could help me in the presentations. I had to schedule the meetings and research on the presentation notes. I requested all the members to share the tasks equally and adhere to the set time schedules. I feared that common learning styles could not be agreed on, since the group consisted six out of the eight students taking the subject hence a heated discussions on the relevant learning methods was inevitable. I was surprised to see the group agree on same learning styles with ease, this may be partly due to the high commitment of members that was established at the formation stage of the group. Each member had different learning needs thus we had to initially agree on the common learning styles that suit the needs of all the members. Some interactive techniques that I personally suggested include brainstorming, problem solving in sub-groups and raising critical questions during the presentations (Daft 2011). Initially I had doubts whether all the members would present themselves for the workshop meetings. This is because all members complained of the limited time available for the workshops and tight learning schedules. I was surprised to see all members report for the workshop and engage in constructive discussions. I had a fear of breakdown in communication during my presentation, but all group members encouraged and helped me with my grammatical mistakes and spelling difficulties (Reece and Rhonda 1993). In order to familiarize all the members on my topic of research, members of the group requested me to prepare handouts that I distributed to them before the actual date of my presentation. Before the onset of my presentation on disciplinary procedures, I made it clear to all group members of the benefits and importance of disciplinary and grievances handling procedures through a visual presentation (Armstrong 1999). I made all the members feel free to ask questions even after the workshop was over through the e-mail address that I provided to them. Initially, I was a bit nervous of counter-arguments but the members encouraged me to take feedbacks from them since opposing views could lead to emergency of new knowledge of the topic. I was not aware of the disciplinary procedures and performance appraisals methods used in evaluating employees work performance. I remember all members communicating effectively due to their excellent interpersonal skills (DeCenzo 2006). I have never experienced such a friendly group that allowed me to take the tasks of interviewing and report writing on the disciplinary and grievances handling procedures in modern organizations. All members collectively decided to utilize problem solving learning style and cooperative learning style since some members had weaknesses like spelling and grammatical mistakes during the workshop. Learning styles Individual and group learning styles were used. Every member used conducted representations and was observant of the representations. Some group members may have had visual difficulties but I managed to present visual diagrams of disciplinary process on large board that was clearly visible to all the group members. Case study analysis and problem solving learning styles were also incorporated in the workshops. Sociological learning style was the best for the group since the members could communicate effectively due to enhanced interpersonal skills (Reid 2005). There was need of different learning styles in order to suit all the needs of the members in the group. The group unanimously agreed on visual learning and oral learning. Each group member was required to make a presentation on the assigned topic. Members were attentive and discussions followed after each presentation (Evans and Sadler-Smith 2006). Sociological learning styles and case study analysis was used in the group level. All members were comfortable with the learning styles chosen. Two of the members doubted whether their learning outcomes could be achieved, I included visual diagrams of the disciplinary procedures to my presentations so as to enable all members to keenly follow my presentation during the workshop (Reid 2005). Though some members did not actively engage in asking questions during the initial meetings, interpersonal skills of the members created a harmonious discussion environment in most of the meetings where even some questions could not receive a definite final answer due to different opinions (Amos 2008). Role of HRM in disciplinary and grievances handling My interactive workshop was about the role of HRM in disciplinary and grievances handling in modern organizations. Prior to the workshop, not all the group members understood the concept and importance of grievances procedures in an organization. I actively involved all the members in identifying the different forms of disciplinary measures in the organization. All members were shocked to hear that low employee performance in the workplace can lead to disciplinary proceedings if the worker does not take measures to improve his performance (Greenberger and Heneman 2002). Brainstorming sessions were critical in arriving to misconduct and other behavior that lead to disciplinary in workplace (Storey 2007). I utilized the Acas Code of disciplinary and grievances handling in the organization to identify the numerous measures of disciplinary. Members of the group suggested various causes of disciplinary action in organizations. Examples of minor misconduct that were discussed include poor time keeping, failure to comply with Company policies, breach of trust and confidentiality, unjustifiable absence from work and misuse of company property. Other minor misconduct that I was not aware of initially includes failure to follow the supervisor’s instructions and neglect of health and safety procedures in the workplace. The debate was cordial and members raised numerous issues especially regarding the severe employee misconduct like possession of drugs in the workplace and malicious destruction of the Company’s property. Extreme employee misconducts that were identified include falsification of documents, fraud, issuing press releases without approval of relevant authority, conflict of interests during work performance, insubordination, and assault of workmates, sexual harassment, bribery and disorderly conduct in the workplace (Jackson and Mathias 2011). However, the issue of employee arrests for crimes and wrongdoing that is not related to employment attracted conflicting reactions and opinions from the members. However, after lengthy discussions, we concluded that it may or may not lead to disciplinary action depending on the policies of the organization and the proceedings of the criminal case (Armstrong 1999). Initially, I was not aware that all employers are required by the employment laws to take Acas Code of practice in to account in employment tribunals considering relevant disciplinary cases. I learnt that employment laws requires employers to act fairly in dismissals by awarding the employee sufficient hearing on the alleged misconduct. Members responded well in discussions concerning the human resource management practices that promote positive employment relationships. Some of the identified factors include respect and appreciation of employees, proper communication channels, and clear leadership styles and encouraging employee involvement in the decision making (Armstrong 1999). The interactive workshop classified the disciplinary measures in two categories; the first was the informal disciplinary measures with the second being the formal disciplinary measures that require official hearing and evidence presentation before the disciplinary panel. Members found out that minor cases of employee misconduct and low work performance could be resolved by informal disciplinary that may include additional training, transfers and coaching of the employee. Members identified actively participated in identifying disciplinary measures that could be taken against an employee for misconduct. A lot of suggestions were made but only few were agreed on like verbal warning, written warning, suspension and dismissal from the workplace. Role playing was used to demonstrate the Acas disciplinary procedure. The members played different roles. I was personally in charge of interviewing and report writing. It was a case analysis of an employee who had been accused of assault in the workplace. One member posed of the employee while a second member played the role of supervisor. There were two members who acted as witnesses while the rest of us played the role of the disciplinary committee. According to the disciplinary procedures, the supervisor informed the employee of the pending disciplinary action due to his misconduct in the workplace. A formal notice was delivered to the employee stating the grounds of disciplinary, the dates of alleged misconduct, the available evidence and disciplinary action that could be taken to the employee if found guilty of the misconduct. The employee was also informed of his right to be accompanied at the hearing and the right to request for a convenient hearing date (Thornely and Lees 1993). The members had to decide on the principles of evidence and fair interviewing thus hearsays and unconfirmed evidence was not allowed during the role play. One issue that arose was the nature of questions that I was supposed to ask the employee, I had to ask questions that were not intimidating or touching on the privacy of the member who played the role of the employee (Burstiner 1998). A convenient time was set for the hearing whereby the employee was given the opportunity to counter accusations of assault. The disciplinary committee interviewed the employee and adduced evidence by calling two witnesses. The mood of the hearing was calm and everybody played his role effectively by giving out information that supported their claims. After evidence, the employee was found guilty of assault since there were photographic presentations by the witnesses of the alleged assault and well documented evidence by the victim of the assault. The employee was disciplined by suspension but was informed of his right to appeal against the decision within sufficient time. The employee made an appeal on the grounds that disciplinary action was harsh and was a first offender. However, due to limitation on number of members and the many roles in the case, the disciplinary committee was allowed to play the roe of appellate tribunal but was cautioned to act objectively by reviewing any new evidence that could was presented to the appeal. The committee acted fairly and decided to reduce the disciplinary action to a demotion accompanied with a written warning. In the warning, it was decided that repeated misconduct of the employee would lead to his termination from the workplace. Some members questioned what could lead to employee engaging in a behavior that could lead to disciplinary action and what could be done to avoid the disciplinary action in organizations (Harding 1998). This led us to deliberate on the grievance handling procedures in the workplace. According to HRM theories, grievances result from employee dissatisfaction with employer like the terms of employment and work environment (Adair 1993). Group members suggested that unwarranted transfers and poor performance evaluation methods or inadequate training opportunities can lead to employee grievances (Hall and Torrington 2001). The discussions changed my perception of disciplinary in the workplace, initially I thought disciplinary procedures are geared at punishing the employee for misconduct and offenses but I have realized the importance of disciplinary behavior is to correct employee behavior and increase organizational productivity (Amos 2008). I have understood the Acas Code of disciplinary procedures that requires fair dismissals whereby an employee should formally be invited to a disciplinary hearing and given enough opportunity to counter the accusations of misconduct (Amos 2008). The employee has a right to be accompanied to the disciplinary hearing and his right to appeal against earlier decision of the disciplinary panel. The course has enabled me understand the critical aspects of disciplinary and grievances handling since it should be fair, impartial and consistent hence formal disciplinary rules should be provided to all employees (Amos 2008). Group processes The group learning process demonstrated that leaders must have certain qualities in order to motivate employees effectively. Leaders should show respect for employees. The group worked harmoniously. According to Belbin model of teamwork, the group was coherent since the plant role that entails new ideas and strategies was covered. There was a coordinator to monitor the suggestions of members (Belbin 2010). According to resource investigator role (RI), the group had established external contacts with other teams in exploring ideas and reporting on new developments (Belbin 2010). According to team worker role (TW), all members were supportive in my grammatical mistakes since team spirit was fostered through improved communications (Harding 1998). I played the Completer Finisher role (CF) by ensuring no omissions or errors were included in report writing and all members were attentive to the discussions. (Belbin 2010). The group followed the Bruce Tuchman’s model of in the development. At the first meeting, formation stage was evident since every member desired to be appreciated and accepted by each of the members (Amos 2008). Meeting schedules were developed in the first meeting and various tasks were assigned to the members. However, in the second meeting, confrontations were evident since some members did not adhere to set principles (Tuchman and Monetti 2011). The second meeting also involved clarifying and assigning tasks to all members. In our third meeting, the group was already in performing stage since individual morale was high and all members showed loyalty and concern for the success of the group. The group was adjourned after the seventh meeting after covering all the relevant tasks and topics. Members were proud of the group achievement (Tuchman and Monetti 2011). (Bruce Tuckman’s model, Tuchman 2011) I believe the group had no sufficient time to plan for the work. The learning styles were effective since case studies were analyzed and problem solved. However, the formation stage should have come earlier before the tasks could be distributed to members. The interactive workshops were limited to seven due to inadequate time. We only spend 40 minutes which was insufficient in covering all roles of HRM in modern organizations. In the next workshop, group members will require enough practice and more time in order to adequately deliberate on each group member suggestions. Some aspects were not fully explored due to conflicting ideas from the members. Communication and presentation skills were effective. In the future, enough time will have to be allocated to the interactive workshops (Tuchman and Monetti 2011). Linking theory and literature The learning outcomes of all members were positive to their learning styles. In choosing the learning styles, we considered several factors like size of the group, time availability, resources and learning outcomes. The group also considered the interpersonal skills and presentation skills of all the members. All members had excellent communication skills hence oral and audio learning skills were preferred (Armstrong 2006). The learning styles involved case studies and problem solving. The members were able to link HRM theory to actual practice through analyzing a case study and identifying the problems that face the particular hypothetical organization (Green 1999). Members were required to offer suggestions on the remedy of the situation. Case study analysis and role playing helped members grasp the actual problems faced by employees in modern organizations (Schuler and Jackson 2008). For instance, a case study of an organization that experienced high labor turnover and low employee morale was analyzed (Amos 2008). The organization rarely trained the employees and provided limited promotion opportunities. On analysis of the case study, members found out that no lack of training and development opportunities, unfair compensation practices, poor leadership style, ineffective recruitment practices and poor performance appraisal methods were the leading causes of high employee turnover and low productivity (Amos 2008). Overall reflection The current approach to EBL used a case study analysis and presentations. In future, EBL will need to use computer simulations and charts since they are more effective in aiding learning with the limited duration. My interpersonal and communication skills were critical in reflecting the outcomes of learning (Adair 1993). In the future, the interactive workshops should have not more than four members since a lot of conflicting and long discussions were evident in the large group of six members. All members understood the learning styles and learning outcomes of each other hence proper methods were utilized. In future, I need to improve on my writing skills since few grammatical errors were evident in my reports. In the future, enough time will be allocated to group meetings and tasks will be assigned earlier enough in order for members to adequately research on their topics. The topic areas researched are critical in modern organizations but more research is needed on counseling role and challenges facing modern HRM (Amos 2008). Opportunities for digital reflection I have compiled a video on the interactive workshops and the learning outcomes achieved. The video has highlighted the meetings and critical roles covered during the research. Conclusion I still need more practical experience in labor relations, change management and counseling services. My ePortfolio that consists of a short video on the research, will enable me demonstrate my understanding of HRM to prospective employers. In the future, I recommend role playing analysis on labor dispute resolutions and counseling services. I can refine my skills joining a leading company as a HR trainee. Bibliography: Adair J. 1993. Effective Leadership, how to develop leadership skills. London. Kogan Page. Amos, T. 2008. Human resource management. Cape Town. Juta. Armstrong, M. 2006. A handbook of human resource management practice. London. Kogan Page. Belbin, R. 2010. Teams roles at work. Oxford. Butterworth-Heinemann. Burstiner, I. 1998. The Small Business Handbook. London. Prentice Hall. Daft, R. 2011. Understanding management. Mason. South-Western Cengage Learning. DeCenzo, D. 2006. Fundamentals of human resource management. New York. John Wiley. Evans, C and Sadler-Smith, E. 2006. Learning styles in education and training. Bradford. Emerald Group. Green, C. 1999. Building Robust Competencies: Linking Human Resource Systems to Organizational Strategies. London. Jossey-Bass. Greenberger, D and Heneman, R. 2002. Human resource management in virtual organizations. Greenwich. Information age Publishers. Hall, L and Torrington, D. 2001. Human resource management. London. Prentice Hall. Harding, S. 1998. Proven management models. Andershot. Gower Publishers. Jackson, J and Mathias, R. 2011. Human resource management: essential perspectives. Mason. South-Western Cengage Learning. Ram, A. 1995. Goal driven learning. Cambridge. MIT Press. Reece, L and Rhonda, B. 1993. Effective Human Relations in Organizations. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Reid, G. 2005. Learning styles and inclusion. London. Paul Chapman. Schuler, R and Jackson, S. 2008. Strategic human resource management. Malden. Blackwell Publishers. Storey, J. 2007. Human resource management: a critical text. London. Thomson Learning. Thornely N. and Lees D. (1993). Leadership, the Art of Motivation, London. Century. Armstrong, M. 1999. A Handbook of Human Resource Management Practice. London. Kogan Page Limited. Tuchman, B and Monetti, D. 2011. Educational psychology. New York. Cengage Learning. Read More