The Industrial Relations - Essay Example

priority of HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT over INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS Table of content 1. INTRODUCTION 2. LITERARY REVIEW 3. COMPARISIONS 4. ANALYSIS 5. CONCLUSION 6. REFERENCES 1. introduction I totally agree with the idea that Industrial relations represents the "old" world whereas HRM represents the "new". There are many reasons in support of my considerations. I have tried to bring up some of the major issues under which it becomes very clear that Human Resource Management or "HRM” is obviously a better option to have effective groundings in the corporate sector, rather than the application of Industrial Relations or "IR". With the globalization of market at every level the participation of HRM is more effective and there comes in more return to the same. The reasons for this are those matters that are very much related to the flexibility of various relations with the client and the customers, the handling of the massive human resources along with their working timing and abilities. The aspects related to collective bargaining for a better enterprising level too is a very vital issue. There were rapid changes coming into the market and under every circumstance the human resources needs to be utilized well to cope up with the increasing demand and meet the needs of the market (pp. 154-166).1. All these are possible if the company has got the proficiency in the management of the human resources participating with it. As for IR all these things were never a part of it and thus were in need of serious modification. The purpose was to meet the criteria to be in the global market and for this the ultimate solution came in with HRM. Added to this the need come up for quality, productivity and the efficiency in making all these worth the profitable target. The amalgamation thus was all possible only through HRM and thus it is it became more popular than IR. Its principles and the policies are more modified and upgraded than IR and thus are more recent. 2. literary review In his "Human Resource Management and Industrial Relations" (1987, p.p 504-505), David E. Guest has come up with some factors in support of the HRM practices in the corporate world. Fore mostly, in order to have an improved state of management and to achieved competitive advantage, it is very important to follow HRM and to make it the mode of administrative stability. The effect is also very prominent when it comes to the traditional role of personnel managers in the corporate world. It is like a solution to gain the potential benefits by means of effective management of people working in the company. As stated by Baird and I. Meshoulam in ‘Managing the Two Fits of Strategic Human Resource Management’ (1988, Vol.13 No.1), HRM brings more space and transparency among the employees and the employers; by the application of it is very convenient to have the declination in the trade union structure. This helps in contributing and concentrating more in the individualistic issues. According the research done by John Purcell there are cause of unitarist outlook is also responsible for the conflict between IR and HRM. In his "Human Resources Management - Implications for Teaching, Theory, Research and Practice in Industrial Relations"; he had made some clear declarations. As per his study the pluralist outlook of IR is mostly responsible for all these kinds of contradictions. In his words, "It is often said that HRM is the visual embodiment of the unitarist frame of reference both in the sense of the legitimation of managerial authority and in the imagery of the firm as a team with committed employees working with managers for the benefit of the firm." The practices of negotiation systems are to a great extend worth for all the means related to the solutions for mutual application of IR and HRM. IR is always sticking to collective bargaining and all sorts of joint consultation. There are though many settlement mechanisms for a better relationship in the enterprise the practice and acceptance are very rare. 3. comparisions As we make a kind of comparison between HRM and IR, we find that IR is more into the pluralistic aspects of make a difference in its presence. It includes the relationship between the employer and the employee and is very much active in maintaining the relationship with the unions 2(1986 No.29). The emphasis is also over making collective relations with the state and the various aspects of it. Whereas HRM believes more in employer and employee relation, keeping it professionally proportionate to the relations for the growth of the company in the market. It never entertains those relations that are not a part of its professional set up. The theory of IR is very much collective in character. The emphasis was more in the labour law and the features related to the freedom of association. There is also equal space for collective bargaining and there is no discouragement in the process of having company strikes. C. Fombrun Tichy, and M.A. Devanna in ‘Strategic Human Resource Management" (1982, 23.2 Winter, 47-61) declares that HRM on the other hand is the more efficient means of dealing with the management that is related to human resources. It is not into the collective relations and thus is more into the means to take out the best of the resources from the people related to the Company. In The Change Masters (1984, p. 241), Rosabeth Moss Kanter was very much clear about the means through which various dealings with individualistic grievances are made more professional in the HRM periphery and thus are very much worth its application. In case of IR the policies dealing with the recruitment purposes are more confusing and there is less scope and space for a fair selection. Whereas in case of HRM; the adoption for the process of recruitment get backed by selection and proper appraisal of the skills. It is also very much concerned with the training and motivation of its employees and thus is of great value. 4. analysis According to David E. Guest there are many driving forces behind the success of HRM. It came after well scrutinised aspects of IR. IR is little more far from the competitive advantage and is more into the collective relations spread all around it. HRM rather is a very systematic and a well organised formulation for the maintenance of high quality production and services in the global perspective. HRM understands the competitiveness more than IR. The simple reason is that it has formulated all its understanding and principles on the basis of the follies the IR keeps on repeating. The task is to sustain and to perform in the global scenario. This is attained more through the application of HRM as it works basically with every particular individual connected to the maintenance of the status of the Company. The initiation of HRM concentrates on educated workforces and thus is a very authentic means for higher individual expectations in the corporate periphery. As it insists changes in every possible aspect of the technology it is always in the need for more flexible employment opportunities. M. Goold and A. Campbell in their ‘Strategies and Styles: The Role of the Centre in Managing Diversified Corporations (1986, p. 78), discovers that there is the regular effort to gain the incorporate HRM in the sections related to the core management policy of the corporate foregrounding. There are the vital aspects of motivation and commitments, that are more particularly taken care of by HRM, rather than IR and all these are done on the basis of the studies and researches taken over the global market. The criteria of organisational behaviour are all taken care of and as such there are many aspects that need to be well affiliated for the application of HRM in the corporate world. The emphasis over the management strategies is the basic concentration as has been prevailed by HRM. Through HRM, there were all kinds of provisions made to gain transparency between the employers and employees in every administrative level. The motto was made clear. There has to be an avoidance of conflict between them so that the company didn’t suffer from it. John Storey in ‘Introduction: From Personnel Management To Human Resource Management’, discusses about such sequences and declares that immediate negotiations are well encouraged and there was the strict adoption of all kinds of mechanism or the dispute settlement and negotiations. Provisions were made for social protection and everyone working for the company was given enough social security and safety. The matters related to health and hygiene was even made a part of HRM. Strict negations were made for the sensitive issues like child labour and exploitations. IR is always with various conciliations, and with arbitration and all sorts of labour courts. The practices are all very pluralist and the individual concern is negligible. Whereas the modified version and the latest practices demand for individualization and that what HRM is all about. Its techniques are all occupied by the basic individualistic approaches; thus are very much popular and is able to get a bond between the employers and the employees3. The focuses are all on employer-employee links and thus are more appreciated than the IR. 1. conclusion As the purpose of any management is to achieve the objectives of the business with the best of the resources that it get and there cannot be anything better than the manpower that involves in it. I feel that rather than industrial relation the HRM is more effective as IR is just an integral part of HRM. HRM has got all those things that are the best ways to be the best in the industry and in the market. There are many points that prove HRM more effective than IR. In fact there has been regular conflict persisting between the two. There are many theories being forwarded in order to complement the relation between the two and there are many researches been done to get the best out of them. IR is always well equipped with efficiency in productivity, determining and following the adequate terms and conditions for the benefit of the employees, getting concern with the social and the interactive section of the business and above all to have a balanced state of consideration to meet all kinds of deals. However in the recent past there is the addition of various mechanisms of communication in order to make all the above features more effective. These mechanisms are all in acute concern with the workplace issues, enterprising sectors and in the purpose of development in every level of industrial set up. The means of tripartite system and various labour laws are made part of this new footage and it is here that HRM became the modern version of IR. Consultation and professional cooperation became the margin for all these negations in industrial and business levels. references Baird and I. Meshoulam "Managing The Two Fits of Strategic Human Resource Management" in 1988 (Vol.13 No.1) Academy of Management Review. David E. Guest "Human Resource Management And Industrial Relations" in Vol.24 Journal of Management Studies 503 at (1987) 504-505. H.L. Angle and J.L. Perry "Dual Commitment and the Labor-Management Relationship Climate" in (1986 No.29) Academy of Management Journal. John Purcell "Human Resources Management - Implications for Teaching, Theory, Research and Practice in Industrial Relations" (IIRA), op.cit. John Storey "Introduction: From Personnel Management to Human Resource Management" in New Perspectives On Human Resource Management, op.cit. at 6. Karen Legge "Human Resource Management: A Critical Analysis" in New Perspectives On Human Resource Management. op.cit. at 35-36. M. Goold and A. Campbell Strategies and Styles: The Role of the Centre in Managing Diversified Corporations (1986, p. 78), Blackwell, Oxford, U.K. Peter Armstrong "Limits and Possibilities for HRM In An Age of Management Accountancy" in New Perspectives On Human Resource Management op.cit. (pp. 154-166). Rosabeth Moss Kanter The Change Masters (1984, p. 241) Unwin Paperbacks, Unwyn Hyman Ltd. Tichy, C. Fombrun and M.A. Devanna "Strategic Human Resource Management" in Sloane Management Review (1982, 23.2 Winter, 47-61) Read More