The strategic relationship between the Organisation and Employees - Essay Example

Human Resource Management Introduction The greatest valued assets in an organization is human; without them, routine functions of the business, such as making business transactions, managing cash flow, dealing with complex clients, and communicating through all types of media. The role played by human is the one that drives the organization in the next level. The progress of organization normally changes continuously. The impact of these changes not only affects the business but also its employees. Therefore, there’s a need to maximize the effectiveness of organization, human potential, individuals’ talent, time, and capabilities, have to be managed. The main purpose of human resources management is to ensure that employees are capable of meeting their organizational goals. On other hand, the organization is eager to attain its goals. There are many human resource management theories that express strategic relationship between the organization and employees, (Michael, 2006). The organization’s human resource roles and responsibilities includes developing strategy for management aimed at maximizing return on investment in terms of human capital utilization as well as financial risk minimization. Human resource in the organization aligns the supply of qualified and skilled individuals of the current workforce capabilities with the future and ongoing requirements and business plans in the organization to secure future success and survival and maximize return on investment. In order to ensure that the achievement of these objectives is met, the purpose of the human resource is to effectively implement its requirements while taking into account the ethical, legal and respect from the workforce. In addition, the organization’s human resource explores the cost-cutting measures which aids in reducing the organizational expenditure through such practices such as outscoring key expertise requited to make the processes in the organization a success. It also implements core contingency measures such as determining future and current requirements in the organization for both contingent workforce and core employees in terms of technical/skills abilities, flexibility and competencies, (Dave, 1996). Trait theory holds that people have qualities or traits they are born with which may be related or associated with certain forms of leadership. Hence, the identification of such qualities or traits in people can help organizations to determine leadership potential in their employees. Some of the traits identified in this theory include intelligence, experience openness, self efficacy and desire for adjustment. An individual manager can therefore acquire these traits through diverse tasks and situations. A manager can demonstrates many of the above identified traits such as intelligence in the manner in which she/he runs the business, openness to her/his employees during monthly meetings where she/he provides the employees with clear information about the company’s performance, self efficacy in the manner she advocates for up-to date equipments which allow for efficacy in company operations and desire for adjustment, (Michael. 2006). Another theory is Theory Y and Theory X which are related to employees in the organization. Theory X is based on the assumption that human beings on average have an innate dislike towards working and thus every human being tend to avoid working at all times. As a result, managers must exercise their authority by threatening and controlling the employees to work. Theory Y is based on the assumption that people are not only prompted by punishment and control in order for them to work, but they are naturally directed by the organizational aims which make them work even harder. From the above trait theory, if a manager can held monthly meetings in the organization, it can allows the employees to contribute on how to achieve the organizational aims naturally without controlling or punishing them. Similarly, mangers need to allow his/her staff to establish their expertise and preferences in specialist areas which are innate abilities and thus employees are naturally directed by aims of the company in their performances. The Path-Goal leadership theory, formulated by Robert House proposed that managers can affect satisfaction, performance and group motivation in various ways such as providing clear clarifications towards achieving the organizational goals, eliminating any form of performance obstacles and offering performance goal rewards to the employees In order to achieve this, Dave (1996) noted that based on situation a manager must adopt a certain style of leadership. For example, applying directive, achievement-oriented, supportive and participative style of leadership. Therefore, organization should have participative and supportive styles of leadership interchangeable in the company. For example, encouraging staff to operate as a team; this is a participative style of leadership that promotes group consultations and information sharing in the company. Similarly, organization must have a supporting style of leadership by ensuring that new employees are supported by their old counterparts who promote sensitivity to the needs of the subordinates and group relations. The Two Factor Theory postulated by Herzberg is a theory of motivation which holds that satisfaction and motivation of employees can be understood by determining the hygiene and motivator factors. The hygiene factors are built upon the concept of work pleasantness and therefore if the employees consider hygiene factors as inadequate, they become demotivated and dissatisfied with their work, (Lazonick, 2002). Examples of hygiene factors identified by Herzberg were administration and company polices, salaries, wages and other type of remunerations, effectiveness of supervision, working conditions, job security and effective interpersonal relations (Herzberg, 1966). The motivating factors are built upon the personal growth desire by each employee. Herzberg identified motivating factors as attaining recognition, status, responsibility, advancement opportunity, stimulating and challenging work as well as sense of personal growth or personal achievement in a job. Conclusion There is a strong bond between organization and its employees. The organization depends on its employees to meet it short and long term goals. In contrast, employees need the organization in order to meet their goals. Therefore, both party must work closely, and maintain their relationship in order to meet their objectives. The HRM has a lot of responsibilities, but above all it must create conducive working environment for all employees for them to meet their individual needs. The HRM theories express how both parties should conduct their roles, hence maintaining their relationship, (Lazonick, 2002). References Armstrong, Michael. 2006. A Handbook of Human Resource Management Practice (10th ed.). London: Kogan Page. ISBN 0-7494-4631-5. OCLC 62282248. Herzberg, F. (1966). Work and the Nature of Man, Cleveland: World Publishing. Ulrich, Dave.1996. Human Resource Champions. The next agenda for adding value and delivering results. Boston, Mass.: Harvard Business School Press. ISBN 0-87584-719-6. OCLC 34704904. William Lazonick. 2002. Innovative Enterprise and Historical Transformation. Enterprise Soc. Read More