Different Perspectives of Employment Relations - Essay Example

? Human Resource Management Introduction Within the context of modern organizations, human resource management is used as a tool for assessing the levels of success or failure from an organization. The critical role of the human resource management function has led to the transition of the focus of the modern organization from personnel management to strategic human resource management (SHRM) throughout the administration of different processes and roles. These roles and processes include recruiting, employee development; the development of learning materials, the structuring of job specifications and during the evaluation of the competency levels of different employees or groups. Modern organizations are employing more analytical approaches to the management of human resources, particularly in the areas of performance management and the management of relations. Due to the expansion in the outlook of the human resource management function of the modern organization, the different perspectives on employment can improve the understanding of HRM practices in modern organizations. Discussion The different perspectives of employment relations are used by industrial relations scholars to project three different frameworks, which view and understand the relations that take place at the work place differently. The different perspectives project workplace relations differently, therefore will interpret different events like conflicts at the work place differently. The role of unions and the regulation of jobs are also projected in a different manner. The pluralist perspective The pluralist perspective views the organization as comprised of different, powerful sub-groups. The different sub-groups are believed to hold legitimate loyalties and as having their own leaders and objectives. More specifically, the perspective points out that the major sub-groups that influence the organization are trade unions and its management. The perspective goes ahead to project that the role of the management is less inclined towards exercising control and enforcement; this has resulted from the balancing effect of co-ordination and persuasion throughout the organization. The changing outlook of the management in the human resource management of modern organizations is documented by Armstrong (2012). The book discusses that the HRM function of the modern organization uses co-ordination and persuasion as tools for increasing the participation of employees and for the improvement of work processes coordination (Armstrong, 2012, p. 583). The shift in the outlook of the HRM function of modern shows that the change has resulted from the realization that persuasion and coordination are more effective in improving organizational performance, as compared to the traditional practices of enforcement and exercising absolute control. Through the exploration of the roles of the HRM function of the modern organization, evidence shows that the HRM practices of the function require influencing the employees for success, which could take the form of influencing their decision-making or their thinking about the organization and its goals (Armstrong, 2012, p. 583). Due to that need of persuading the employees, the HRM officers are required to have persuasion skills and excellent case presentation abilities, which enable them to project the vision of the organization into the scope of the employees. Facilitation is very important in enhancing the effectiveness of the HRM function, mainly because it increases the decision-making potential of groups and teams, which is often related to the development of ideas or solutions for organizational problems. The co-donation of organization-wide and group-based discussions is also necessary in increasing the effectiveness of the HR function (Armstrong, 2012, p. 583). This is because the process leads to the development of conclusions that are satisfactory to all members. The pluralist perspective views that trade unions should be allowed to represent employees, and where conflict arises, the two sub-groups should resolve them through collective bargaining. The emphasis here is that the strategic bargaining of the management and the trade union can trigger the evolution of the human resources, which yields positive change (Salamon, 2000). Based on this information, it becomes evident that the modern organization recognizes the power of the trade union, and instead of fighting it, they use their interests to propel employees to perform better. The improvement in employee performance results from the fact that the HR function should highlight the shared objectives and interests of the trade union and the HR function, while at the same time addressing the differences in opinion (Wachter, 2004, p.165-170). Through effectively streamlining the relations between the HR function and the trade union, the employees feel more secure, and are therefore likely to offer more efforts and focus towards the realization of organizational goals (Salamon, 2000). The Unitarist Perspective The unitarist perspective views the organization as a harmonious, integrated whole where the ideal outlook appears like that of a happy family, where the members of staff and the management share a common purpose and highlight mutual cooperation. This perspective informs the understanding of the HR function of modern organizations, as one that plays a role encompassing the relations between the management and the employees of the organization (Lewin, 2001). The emphasis on mutual and establishing a common purpose requires the human resource function to fashion its relations with the employees, in a way that reflects the interests of both groups. For example, the HR function should use incentives to compel the employees to perform better and to increase productivity, not because they are compelled to do that, but because their interests in the incentives drive them to increase their productivity (Tsogas, 2001). The unitarist perspective guides that the organization should have a paternalistic outlook towards employees, calling for the loyalty of all and is mainly managerial in its outlook. This emphasis on pushing for loyalty from all employees and the emphasis on the managerial outlook is evident from the HR practices of modern organizations, which motivate employees and gain their loyalty through offering policies and administrative structures that are favourable to both groups (Tsogas, 2001). This outlook is highlighted through the emphasis placed on communication within the modern organization’s administration and the HR function, where communication gaps or hitches are resolved in a speedy manner. Through the resolution of conflict, the loyalty of the employees is regained, and the common goals of the organization are cooperatively pursued by all. Through the establishment of platforms where the interests of the management and employees is mutually coordinated, the role of the trade union becomes less significant. This outlook by the unitarist perspective emphasizes the extension in the roles of the HR function, where – unlike that of the traditional organization – it did not emphasize conflict resolution between management and employees, towards incorporating the interests of the two groups. The changing outlook of the HR function shows that the trade is an outsider to the organization therefore it is less likely to bridge the relations between management and employees; the cooperative contribution and effort between the groups is more effective (Thompson and Newsome, 2004, p. 135-136). This is the reason why many modern organizations have developed systems for conflict resolution within the organization, and more importantly, communication is considered a very important tool for the different groups (MacLean, 2006). The Radical perspective The radical perspective emphasizes the working of the capitalist system, where a perpetual difference in interests exists between the owners of capital and the givers of labour. Due to the outlook of this conflict, the perspective views workplace relations as incapable of maintaining the favourable balance of the interests between workers and the management. The perspective views that the inequalities of power and wealth can be traced to the working of the capitalistic system (Abbott, 2006). Through this outlook of the radical perspective, the study of the practices of the human resource function of modern organizations shows that the conflicts are continually being resolved; this helps to ensure that the interests of the management and those of employees are balanced (Bailey, Berg and Sandy, 2001). Unlike the traditional outlook of organizations –where the conflicts existing between management and employees were irreconcilable and investable – the modern organization uses the HR function to balance the two interest groups (Blyton and Turnbull, 1998). Through resolving the perpetual conflicts, and guaranteeing the different sides that their interests are incorporated into the management of the organization, the employees identify with the goals of the organization (Abbott, 2006). For example, the HR functions of modern organizations have been known to offer overtime pay to workers that offer more service than they are paid to do, and the over-time pay motivates them to offer more service, which increases performance (Bacon, 1999). The radical perspective holds the view that conflict is a common phenomenon, and trade unions are an ordinary response to the exploitation of the owners/ managers of organizations. However, from the observation of modern organizations, the HR function has changed the scope of its practices, to ensure that the perpetual conflict discussed under the radical perspective does not affect the performance of employees. The radical perspective shows the contrast between the outlooks of the modern organization and that of the traditional organization (Akorsu and Akorsu, 2009). Conclusion The study of modern organizations shows that human resource management is used as a tool for the assessment of the performance of an organization. The critical roles of the human resource management function have shifted to fit into the span of strategic human resource management, although the roles of recruiting, employee development, the structuring of job specifications and the evaluation of competency levels. From the pluralist perspective, it is evident that the functions of a human resource management employ persuasion and coordination in a strategic manner, so as to increase the motivation levels of employees. From the unitarist perspective, the organization functions like a united family, where the management and the employees of an organization are supposed to work cooperatively, so as to ensure that conflicts do not develop. From the study of modern organizations, the HR function ensures to employ policies and structures that balance the interests of the employees and the management. The radical perspective holds that conflict between employees and the owners of capital is a normal phenomenon; therefore trade unions are instrumental in maintaining a balance in industrial relations. From the radical perspectives, modern organizations have avoided the pitfall of conflict by employing a conflict resolution mechanism as part of the HR functions role. Reference list Abbott, K., 2006. A Review of Employment Relations Theories and Their Application. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 1, pp. 187-190. Akorsu, A.D. and Akorsu, P.K., 2009. Human Resource Management Practice: A Substitute for Trade Unionism. Journal of Business and Enterprise Development, pp. 28-34. Armstrong, M., 2012. Armstrong's Handbook of Human Resource Management Practice. Twelfth Edition. London: Kogan Page. Bacon, N., 1999. Union De-recognition and the New Human Relations: A Steel Industry Case Study. Work, Employment and Society, 13(1), pp. 4-10. Bailey, T., Berg, P. and Sandy, C. (2001). The Effect of High Performance Workplaces on Employees Earning in Steel, Apparel and Medical Electronic and Imaging Industries. Industrial and Labor Relations Journal, 54(2! Extra Issue), pp. 525-530. Blyton, P. and Turnbull, P., 1998. The Dynamics of Employee Relations. London: Macmillan. Lewin, D., 2001. IR and HR Perspectives on Workplace Conflict: What Can Each Learn from the Other? Human Resource Management Review, 11(4), pp: 453–85. MacLean, N., 2006. Freedom Is Not Enough: The Opening of the American Workplace. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Salamon, M., 2000. Industrial Relations: Theory and Practice. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Thompson, P. and Newsome, K., 2004. “Labour Process Theory, Work, and the Employment Relation.” in Bruce E. Kaufman (ed.), Theoretical Perspectives on Work and the Employment Relationship. Champaign, IL: Industrial Relations Research Association. Tsogas, G., 2001. Labour Regulation in a Global Economy. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe. Ulrich, D. and Brockbank, W., 2005. The HR Value Proposition. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Wachter, M., 2004. “Theories of the Employment Relationship: Choosing Between Norms and Contracts,” in Bruce E. Kaufman (ed.), Theoretical Perspectives on Work and the Employment Relationship. Champaign, IL: Industrial Relations Research Association. Read More