Application Theory in Practice - Essay Example

Process Critique of Application Theory in Practice I. Introduction The contention of incongruity between theory and practice is not exclusive in other fields of endeavor but also extends to the field of management. Theory is criticized by practitioners as “mundane and un-reflexive. . . framed in the sphere of abstract knowledge, within the ambit of the academy and “characterized as dry, erudite, perhaps reflexive, but reductive and limited in scope” (Carless et al., 2009). Human Resource and Management Practitioners on the other hand are characterized as obstinate, due to its non-application of many effective human resource practices despite the evidences that empirically support them (Johns, 1993; Muchinsky,2004, cited in Carless et al., 2009). As a result, knowledge of best practices did not necessarily mean the adoption of these best practices (Hoque & Noon, 2001). One of the plausible explanations given with this gap is lack of knowledge. The necessity of the transfer of knowledge to line managers for application may have been important but often a neglected issue. Study showed that while Industrial and Organizational psychologists “are informed about HR research findings than HR practitioners” (Carless et al., 2009:110) this does not translate into practice. II. Application of theory in practice: human resources It is already a given in human resource management that for a business enterprise to achieve optimum productivity, it should hire the best people. It is also a common knowledge to a point of being a slogan among companies that human resource or its people are its most important assets. Being the most important asset, human resource should be taken cared of so that they will be more motivated to perform and will stay in the organization. This notion however tends to be neglected and overlooked in practice when realities set in the organization. When the issue of competitiveness set in where companies have to lower cost to increase its profit, it tends to shortchange its employees. Shortchanging employees takes in many forms and is not limited to offering lowest pay possible. It includes compressing multiple job functions into a single role to save cost and to optimize the labor of such employee. If the human resource has already been optimized to the hilt, companies will tend to outsource other functions where they can lower labor cost and without any responsibilities to the outsourced employee. In the recent financial crisis of late 2008 to 2010, human resource was among the first casualty when companies employed cost saving measures to cope with the crisis. Employees felt that they are not that valuable to the companies that there is a growing perception among employees that they will move on to other companies once the economy has fully recovered (Sadri & Golnaz, 2011,:46). This only illustrates that in reality, there is a big discrepancy in the practice of human resource management compared to theory. III. Application of theory in practice: Management Management is the steward of a business enterprise. Its task is not only to keep the organization a going concern but also to make it thrive and grow. In making economic decisions that affects the general well being of a company, it has to make use of its management tools to be able to make decisions that are rational and beneficial to the company. It has to consider also the different stakeholders of the company that does not only include its stockholders, but its employees as well. The disconnection between theory and practice in management comes when management becomes too engrossed with its bottom line and the value of its stock prices. The classic example that we can glean from this is Enron where its leadership became too focused on how to increase the value of its stock prices that it resorted to exotic accounting practices and promoted a group process in the organization that cultivates inequity and fraud. Management is supposed to reinforce job performance that is based on objective criteria. At Enron, this process was defeated when it arbitrarily rate half of its employee as non-performers and encourage its employees to be ruthlessly competitive. This shows a classic difference between what management should do and what it is capable of doing just to enhance its profit. IV. Application of theory in practice: Employee relations Management would always say that its employees are its most important asset. Being such, that it will do everything in its disposal to keep its employees happy for them to stay and perform. Such, Employee Relation Departments are put up under the hood of Human Relations Divisions to be able to attend to its employees. The reality of practice however says otherwise. While there are companies who really look after their employees, there are also companies who shirk this responsibility. Employment arrangements such as flexible employment, temporary employment, that are now becoming common among companies are really human resource devices to get most out of an employee at the least cost and responsibility to the company. More and more companies are minimizing the number of its permanent employees to avoid the costs associated in retaining them. Clearly, while management recognizes that human resource is its most important asset, it is still driven by profit that it will dodge employee relations whenever it can, a classic tendency of disconnect between theory and practice in employee-employer relationship. V. Conclusion This gap between theory and practice in terms of human resource, management and employment relation is not an isolated phenomenon. The lack of link between theory and practice had always been a perennial debate between theorist and practitioners. As Carr explained, considering the very nature of “abstract and highly general principles produced by educational theory” and the diversity of the real world, “no single account of closing the gap between theory and practice is sufficient to successfully render the diversity of understandings and experiences of ‘relevance’ within the discipline” (1980:61). Relevance as a strategy for closing this gap, and how this relevance can be accomplished and performed had become more compelling because of the silence of management literatures on the matter (Brownlie et al., 2007). Jacqueline Fendt, Renata Kaminska-Labbe and Wladimar Sachs argued however that this can be addressed by returning to the principles of pragmatism and to have the desire to produce useful knowledge (as cited in Brownlie et al., 2007). The apparent disconnect between theory and practice can be bridge by the notion of relevance of study to practice which can be achieved through collaboration between practitioners and academicians. This can be done “through working within their own tacit knowledge to produce their own theories into action (Brownlie et al., 2007). Through this process, academicians will learn and modify their theories according to reality while practitioners will be able to make speedy assessments to ground studies into the real world striking a bridge and a balance between the “real world” and the slow, ponderous, process of the academic (Brownie at al., 2007). In conclusion, to generate a bridge and a linkage between management theory and practices, to the point that the knowledge of best practices of management can be transferred into practice, both parties should work together. Management theory alone without grounding it on the reality of the workplace will be reduced to a mere academic musing whose usefulness cannot be validated by experience. In contrast, practice without the benefit of science of how to do things in the workplace will lead to an inefficient and ineffective management practices. For each of them to achieve relevance, theory and practice must collaborate because practice perfects the theory. References: Brownlie, Douglas; Hewer, Paul; Wagner, Beverly (2008). Management Theory and Practice: Bridging the Gap through Multidisciplinary Lenses. Special Issue of European Business Review, 20(6):461-470. Carr, W (1980), “The Gap between Theory and Practice”, Journal of Further and Higher Education, 4, (1), pp 60-69. CARLESS, SALLY A.; RASIAH, JANA; IRMER, BERND E (2009). Discrepancy between human resource research and practice: Comparison of industrial/organisational psychologists and human resource practitioners beliefs. Australian Psychologist, 44 (2): 105-111. Hoque, K., & Noon, M. (2001). Counting angels: A comparison of personnel and HR specialists. Human Resource Management Journal (11) 5–22. Sadri, Golnaz; Bowen, Clarke R. (2011). Meeting EMPLOYEEE requirements: Maslows hierarchy of needs is still a reliable guide to motivating staff. Industrial Engineer: IE. 43(10):44-48. Read More