The Concepts of Person-Job Fit and Person-Organization Fit in Recruitment and Selection Strategy - Assignment Example

Human Resource Management Name Instructor’s Name Q1. Please discuss how the concepts of ‘person-job fit’ and ‘person-organization fit’ can inform either a) a recruitment strategy or b) a selection strategy According to the article, hiring competent staff is very important and is dependent on effective selection procedures that target to get the most appropriate individuals and turn down those who are not appropriate. It is very important to hire the right staff since poor selection can heavily cost the employer. Some of the costs that the employer is likely to incur include training costs, lower productivity, and loss of clients, redundancy packages and recruitment fees (Collings & Mellahi, 2009). Therefore, this implies that the management should always get the right people to do the required task or else they are likely to get losses in the long-run (Newell, 2005). F.W Taylor, a management writer once bemoaned the criteria used in selecting individuals since it was favored the first person in the queue as well as individuals known by the person recruiting. At that time, one’s ability to do job was never stressed and Taylor introduced the notion that personnel must be selected for specific abilities and skills that must be examined before the selection decision. In spite of emphasis by F.W Taylor organization fail to adopt the basic selection procedures that will enable them recruit suitable candidates and then make good predictions regarding the likely ‘fit’ between specific individuals and job and organizational requirements. The concepts of ‘person-job fit’ and ‘person-organization fit’ can inform e a selection strategy since selection of individuals entails making the right decision regarding projected behavior which can be made about who will be suitable for specific job (Newell, 2005; Saks & Ashforth, 1997). Always, prediction should be couched according to probabilities since the future cannot be predicted. Nonetheless, informed judgments can be reached upon rather than uninformed guesses. Consequently, this necessitates a systematic process of assessing individual differences as well as organizational requirements (Collings & Mellahi, 2009). The process of selecting employees has been perceived to be a process that the organization attempts to accurately match the person to the job and can be likened to completing a jigsaw puzzle. The process of selecting involves selecting the right jigsaw piece from the various incorrect pieces so that they can fit into a specific hole in the jigsaw puzzle. The most important thing is to find selection methods that can predict the ‘best’ employee from ‘bad’ employee (Collings & Mellahi, 2009). The psychometric criterion, fitting someone to a particular job is a dominant perspective and underpins good practice model on both recruitment and selection. According to psychometric perspective jobs are defined according to their tasks as well as the attributes of the individual that will be in position to conduct the tasks is then developed. Selection process entails establishing differences between several candidates to get the person with the profile that best matches the specifications that are required in the job description. An individual who can show the highest number of desirable and/ or essential competencies is offered the job (Newell, 2005). Before anyone is given a job, various things are considered. Firstly, a job analysis is conducted. The job analysis helps in determining the suitability of the potential employee to fit in the position to be filled in the organization (Saks & Ashforth, 1997). To determine the suitability of the potential employee the job holder can be asked to explain their key tasks and responsibilities. Suitability of a potential employee can be focused on critical incidents. The potential employees are asked to remember particular incidents of either poor or good job performance. This helps in providing an indication of various fundamental aspects regarding the job and offers insight into how suitable job-holders can be differentiated (Collings & Mellahi, 2009). Another technique is repertory grid and it has several versions, however the most common is to ask the respondents to think of 5 to 6 job incumbents they worked with anonymously. Structured questionnaires can also be used to gather data regarding particular jobs. For instance, the Position Analysis Questionnaire (PAQ) it has about 200 items that are grouped in six heading: work output, mediation processes, information input, job context, interpersonal activities, work situation as well as miscellaneous elements (Newell, 2005). Q2. What is talent management and is it likely to be an effective HR approach within organizations? (750 words max) According to the article talent management are process and activities which involve identification of important posts that contribute to an organizations competitive advantage, talent development as well as high performance incumbent to take the functions and develop a human resource system so as to expedite filling of the posts with the proficient incumbents as well as making sure that there is continuous commitment in the organization (Collings & Mellahi, 2009). Consequently, important posts are not only restricted to the top management group but include important posts at lower levels than the top management team and can differ among the operational units and also in the long run (Wall & Wood, 2005). According to the article talent management is something very serious to various stakeholders beyond human resource academics as well as professional. There are three streams of thought which center on the idea of talent management. Firstly, auxiliary label for management of talent for management of human resource. Often, research on the tradition limits emphasis on specific human resource activities, for instance, development of leaders, recruitment, planning succession and many others. The second strand emphasizes on development of talents tools that focus on projection of employee or staffing requirements as well as managing progression of the employees through positions. Typically, studies in the tradition develop on initial investigation in planning of succession or manpower planning texts. The third stream puts emphasis on managing talented individuals. According to these texts, all the roles in an organization ought to be occupied by “A performers,” also known as “top-grading” and put emphasis on management of “C players”, or consistently non-performers from the organization (Wall & Wood, 2005). Even though the third approach is very influential one can recognize the limitation in this method contends that it is not appropriate or desirable to fill all the posts in any organization by top performers (Wall & Wood, 2005). Apart from the three streams of thought that have been mentioned regarding talent management there is another stream that puts focus on the identification of important points that have differentially impact on the competitiveness of a firm. The beginning point is documentation of important posts and not talented persons per se. The latter method notifies the development of theory (Wall & Wood, 2005). The second aspect of the definition puts emphasis on developing talent pool of only performing as well as high potential occupants to occupy the responsibilities, which contribute to competitiveness of an organization. According to the first element in the definition, organizations ought to differentiate between strategic performer’s employees and the ones who are not. For pivotal or strategic jobs to have differential among employees’ strategic performers it is fundamental that these jobs are occupied by high performing employees (Wall & Wood, 2005). This implies that talent management is important since individuals with talent in an organization will be more considered to conduct specific activities in the organization while those without talent will occupy less attractive positions in the organization. Individuals with no talents can also be trained on various issues in an organization so that they can be able to conduct their activities effectively. Consequently, this implies that talent management is an important asset in any organization and when it is used effectively, an organization can easily surpass its objectives (Collings & Mellahi, 2009). Even though talent management is an important element in organization employees in talent pool are only high, successes and they can be disenchanted when they are given responsibilities that have inadequate scope for applying their skill development. Therefore, when jobs are intricate employees become more satisfied, more motivated and even very productive (Collings & Mellahi, 2009). Considering that individuals included in an organizational talent pool are high achievers, the effect of taking part in tedious tasks can be puffed up and it leads to in decreasing employee’s supposed person organization (Wall & Wood, 2005). In any organization that does not consider talent management to be an important asset then it can be compared to starting a journey without knowing where you are headed since you may end-up anywhere and will not achieve any goals compared to when one would have had targets that are supposed to be achieved. Therefore, talent management can be compared to a road map that will show how the organization will attain its objectives. Talent management is also important in an organization since it will help the management in determining enumeration of the employees since talented employees cannot have the same enumeration as employees with little or no talent at all (Saks & Ashforth, 1997). Q3 Drawing on both theory and research evidence, what appears to be the best explanation (or explanations) for why HRM might be related to organizational performance? According to Collings & Mellahi (2009), human resource management is used to show the part of organizational activities that are about recruitment, development as well as management of the employees. In that domain, present interest focuses mainly on HRM systems that emphasize various practices: erudite selection methods, training, appraisal, teamwork, empowerment, communications, employment security as well as performance-related pay. Wholesomely, they are thought to help in knowledge and skill base in an organization as well as employees’ alacrity to show their knowledge so that the organization can be advantaged (Saks & Ashforth, 1997). The logic for emphasizing on commitment method to Human Resource Management depends on assumptions that the activities will improve the performance of the organization. The new practices will be unique as well as sustainable edge since unlike creativities like institution of novel technology leads to knowledge and skill, which will have a significant impact to the organization and therefore it, will be intricate to imitate. Usually, companies copy their competitors’ technologies easily than they can copy another company’s human resource capabilities (Collings & Mellahi, 2009). The association between performance and HRM has been conceived in a number of ways. The easiest perception is that the practices are additive and they improve organizational performance irrespective of the conditions. Alternative perspective put emphasis on a number of ‘fit’. Firstly, internal fit places synergy between various practices this means that their collective impact is more than the total of the separate parts. The second type of fit is the ‘organizational fit’ that is about responsibility of Human Resource Management in improving the efficiency of various organizational activities or technologies (Liu, Hall & Ketchen, 2006). HRM and total quality management are activities that are corresponding in their implications on the performance of the organization. Total commitment to HRM practices is effective in lean production initiatives. The last category is the ‘strategic fit’, which posits that Human Resource Management should be aligned to organizational strategy so that it can have its full impact on performance in an organization (Collings & Mellahi, 2009). Typically, empirical investigations of fit entails testing interface of the effects. Since fit is pertinent to various effects of Human Resource Management on the performance, it is important to regulate the level that the interactions being examined. Strategic human resource management aims at understanding how HRM practices impact organization-wide results. HRM practices which Strategic human resource management theorists regard performance enhancing are also called high-performance work practices (HPWPs). HPWPS include training, employee participation, incentive compensation, selectivity as well as elastic work schedules. Strategic human resource management theory emphasizes that the practices aid to increase abilities, skills, knowledge, authorize employees so that they can leverage their knowledge, abilities and skills to the advantage of an organization and increase motivation of employees to do so. It leads to higher job gratification, low employee turnover, better decision making as well as higher productivity, these aids in improving performance (Collings & Mellahi, 2009). Additionally, HPWPs operate through organizations internal social structures so that there can be higher efficiency and flexibility (Liu, Hall & Ketchen, 2006). HRM is related to organization performance since there are various HRM management approaches that help in improving the performance of an organization, for instance, the HPWPS. SHRM researchers show three ways in which mediators through HPWPs have an impact on performance of the organization. The HPWPs operate through (a) improving personnel knowledge, skills as well as abilities (KSA) (b) authorizing the employees to act as well as (c) inspiring employees. Wide recruiting as well as selectivity in staffing helps to bring knowledge, skills and abilities in the organization. Further, the KSAs are advanced through job design, training, and enumeration that is in tandem with skill development. Often employees give results that are below what they are supposed to deliver since they have unrestricted use of their talent as well as time. Consequently, personnel have to be enthused so that they can leverage their knowledge, skills and abilities. HPWPs like performance appraisal, incentive compensation, and internal promotion policies offer incentives to help in motivating employees (Liu, Hall & Ketchen, 2006; Collings & Mellahi, 2009). HPWPs, for instance, flexible work schedules, employment security, processes for airing their grievances as well as high general compensation can amplify inspiration through snowballing the commitment of employees. Knowledgeable, skilled as well as motivated staff will not use their unrestricted talent and tie unless structures in the organization as well as job design provide the environment to act. The required level can be improved through HPWPs, for instance, self-managed teams, participation packages, employment security and information sharing. Generally, HPWPs enhance organizational performance through increasing knowledge, abilities and skills, empowering employees so that they can leverage their skills, knowledge and abilities for the benefit of the organization and motivating the employees to do so (Liu, Hall & Ketchen, 2006). The impact of HPWPs on performance of organization is increased through effect on an organization’ social structures, a case in point, HPWPs like flexible job designs and self-managed teams link individuals who never interact and this expedites resource exchange and sharing information. Additionally, HPWPs like training, compensation and selectivity in staffing help to augment comprehensive norms of interchange through aiding recruiting and retaining individuals who are more likely to develop the customs. Interchange norm develops organizational elasticity through enhancing collaboration in intricate solving of issues. Additionally, HPWPs such as training, selectivity as well as sharing information help develop collective mental prototypes among the employees. These are alike and corresponding knowledge sets, and principles regarding tasks coworkers, organization which facilitates decision making as well as cooperation. A positive change in internal social structure enhances organizational efficiency and flexibility (Liu, Hall & Ketchen, 2006). HPWP enhances organizational performance in overlapping as well as interactive procedures. First, HPWPs give personnel KSAs required to undertake job tasks, opportunity as well as motivation. Second, it enhances the internal social structures within organizations that facilitate cooperation and communication among employees. Jointly the processes enhance job gratification and help the personnel to be productive and make informed choices. Consequently, it lowers employee turnover as well as enhances organizational performance against players (Liu, Hall & Ketchen, 2006).SHRM theorists provided explanations why value of the HPWPs amplifies various activities are combined to become a synchronized system. Firstly, the practices have additive implications. This can occur when various selection tools recognize exclusive job skills. Another purpose is that interactions arise when a practice strengthens another practice. For instance, training improves participation packages since personnel are well armed to make choices which participation programs help to make (Collings & Mellahi, 2009). However, it is conceivable for manifold practices to lower organizational performance. This takes place the moment two activities are substitutes, for instance when teaching is offered to improve the skills that employees already have. In replacement, cost of enforcing second procedures is wasted. Two practices can also result in a tough amalgamation since they will work not in favor of each other (Liu, Hall & Ketchen, 2006). Frequently, this takes place when managers that implement teams and leave compensation that focuses on the performance of individuals. Nonetheless, on the balance SHRM scholars affirm that HPWP criteria must out shine individual practices (Collings & Mellahi, 2009). The idea that various interventions ought to have greater impacts than one interpolation is in various research streams. Meta-analysis provides an exceptional chance to prove that existent proof validates scholars’ emphasis on the HPWP systems. Since HPWPs enhances employee KSAs, empower the employees so that they can leverage their KSAs as well as motivate the employees to do so, this affects employees discretionary effort, productivity and creativity. In turn, these increases various performance measure such as job satisfaction and employee turnover that transcends into increased accounting returns as well as market value (Liu, Hall & Ketchen, 2006). Basing on this rationale, HPWPs ought to affect operational performance measures, for instance, market returns, growth, accounting returns. Even though HPWPs must eventually have an impact on the measurement sets, operational results are closer to behavioral improvement the employees are required to make. There ought to be no slippage when implementing the HPWPs, enhanced employee behaviors, as well as operational measures that register the performances. In contrast, growth, market returns and accounting returns show organizational performance dimension, which are detached from the HPWPs and are easily affected by various factors, for instance, recent acquisition activity and diversification strategy. The outcome is high capriciousness in the bookkeeping return, market returns, growth and the HPWPs depict lesser portion of the changeability. Subsequently, the association between the HPWPs as well as operational performance procedures of productivity to turnover ought to be stronger compared to remote financial performance extents, for example, growth, market returns and accounting returns (Liu, Hall & Ketchen, 2006). In nutshell human resource management as well as organizational performance are two things that go hand in hand. When an organization has good HRM, it will have high organizational performance. When an organization has good HRM it will have, high organizational performances since the organization will have the best human resource that will the organization achieve its objectives. On the other hand, when an organization does not have efficient HRM it will imply that it will not be in position of achieving its objectives and this will mean that it will be wasting its resources. References Collings, D & Mellahi, K. (2009). Strategic talent management: A review and research agenda. Human Resource Management Review, 304-313. Liu, J., Hall, A & Ketchen, D. (2006). How much do high-performance work practices matter? A meta-analysis of their effects on organizational performance. Personnel Psychology, 59, 501-528 Newell, S. (2005). Managing human resources: Personnel management in transition. Blackwell Publishing ltd. Oxford. Saks, A & Ashforth, B. (1997). A longitudinal investigation of the relationship between job information sources, applicant perceptions of fit and work outcomes. Personnel Psychology Wall, T & Wood, S. (2005). The romance of human resource management and business performance and the case for big science: Human relations. Retrieved from http://hum.sagepub.com/content/58/4/429 Read More