HRM Contribution to Organizations and Society, the Kantian Ethics Theory - Coursework Example

HRM Contribution to Organizations and Society Introduction The human resource management has gained prominence in modern organizations as firms and institutions have realized the need to incorporate and engage its human resources in order to counter stiff global competition and produce and deliver quality that effectively and efficiently meet the rising demands of the global market. Human resources are considered the most valuable and reliable asset to an organization owing to the fact that the other resources to an organizations cannot be utilized adequately without the human resource. Kramar et al. (2011, p.4) describes HRM as the policies and systems that impacts on the conduct, attitudes and performance of employees. The main responsibility of the human resource manager is to create a link between the human resources with the organizational goals and strategies by communicating the role of employees, the need and the methods of achieving the anticipated business outcomes. The HRM has evolved to integrate ethics where the organizational human resources are expected to comply to ethical standards and principles and more importantly act as ethical stewards and the conscious of organizations as supported by Kramar et al., (2011, p. 542). This forms the basis of this report, which seeks to critically discuss the ethicality of HRM using the Kantian Ethics theory. Critical Discussion Prior to analysing how ethical or unethical HRM is using the Kantian Ethics theory, it is important to highlight the Kantian Ethics theory. The Kantian Ethics Theory is an ethical theory where one acts in such a way that they treat humanity whether in their own person or in the person of any other, always at the same time as an end and never merely as a means to an end (Winstansley & Woodall, (2000, p. 50). For that reason, HRM can only be perceived as ethical if it treats people as human beings and person in-itself rather than a means, a tool, an instrument, a device and a resource. Therefore, HRM is unethical because it treats people as a means and as a resource to achieve its end, which is to achieve anticipated business outcomes. HRM defines its labour forces as an organizational resource and not as people who supports it in achieving set strategic goals, mission, vision and objectives. By defining the labour forces as organizational resource, the HRM gives the labour forces the same status and importance as it does to other non-human or non-living organizational resources such as capital, finance, material resources, technology and information among others. From HRM point of view, labour forces are merely resources, which provide a means of enhancing the value and quality of organizational products and services produced and delivered. In addition, increasing the capacity of production of goods and services to ensure that the organization is able adequately and competently meet the changing needs and rising demands of its market, enhance its competitive advantage against its rivals and increase sales and the market shares, with the sole purpose of improving the profit margins. In regards as to why organizations and firms should be ethical, Kantian theory indicates that one should be moral not out of pity and self interest, but because being ethical is a requirement of reason as highlighted by Schwartz & TUC, (2007, p 231). The practice of developing the human resources into ethical stewards is not meant to enhance the credibility and reliability of the labour forces themselves, but it is intended to influence the perceptions of the larger masses or existing and potential markets into perceiving the organization as credible and hence, improve an organization’s brand image and brand equity. This is because, when the human resources act as good ethical stewards, the public perception will be that if the employees are that ethical then the organization must be and hence, they either become potential customers or they enhance their loyalty which boils down to increased market shares and sales which directly translates to improved profitability. This means that by HRM developing human resources who are ethical stewards with the intention to capitalize on that and generate more business from the improved public confidence serves as self interest thus, making HRM unethical. As Kantian Ethics theory proposes, an action becomes a right or a wrong not on the sum of its end results but that it conform to moral law as highlighted by Winstansley & Woodall (2000, p. 50). This is because it is not enough to merely do a morally correct deed since it may be based on motive of self-interests that have little to do with morality, but deeds are ethical when they conform to moral law, which is not founded on perception, usefulness but on pure reason as discussed by Mabey, et al., (p. 21). Acting ethically on part of HRM is not enough, the reason behind the ethical action is what determines whether HRM is ethical or not and by using ethics to influence the market is surely a motive of self interest and therefore , unethical. Sims (2007, p.530) indicates that HRM is a multidisciplinary practice that is entangled in complexities of balancing work related issues with organizational social interactions. For this reason, defining HRM purely from an ethical point of view where HR professionals are expected to be the conscious of organizations as suggested by Kramar et al. (2011. p. 542) is rather misplaced if not misleading. This is because; the HRM is established in an organization not merely to serve the interests of the people of the organization but to help achieve the set business goals. Storey (2007, p.257) argues that only people have ethical agency but organizations do not. This is because organizations have no pathology, which means they are not made of flesh and blood, and hence, have no moral agency and therefore, it is illogical to perceive and expects HRM as a unit of an organization to be ethical, which means one would be confusing business with ethics. The author notes that HRM cannot serve two masters, that is serve the interests of the organization and at the same time serve the interest of others (the labour forces). This is because as Jensen 2002, (p. 237) points out, ‘it is logically impossible to maximize in more than one dimension at the same time, unless the dimensions are monotone transformations of one another” as noted by Storey, (2007, p.257). Advancing ethical HRM where all parties or persons are always at the same time as an end and never a means to an end as recommended by Kantian Ethics theory. The theory is a concept that is hard although not impossible to apply due to the dissonance that exists between capital and labour relations where the HRM pursues to support the organization in maximizing profits and minimizing costs while pursuing to have safe, secure and favourable working environments for the labour forces Budd & Scoville, (2005, p. 68). Often ethical enhancement of the working environment for the latter is difficult to achieve particularly where the supports for ethical standards generating financial profits are inadequate or unavailable as highlighted by Koster, (2007, p. 13). Be it as it may, HRM is a practice that is based on people interactions and therefore should be defined and established on an ethical platform owing to the impact behaviour, attitudes, perceptions and ideals plays in influencing the productivity and performance of people in an organization and are thus, core to organizations succeeding in its goals and mission. For this reason, HRM is unethical because in pursuant of the goal of aligning the needs of the organization to those of the human resources, it incorporates other systems and resources to ensure it is able to do this effectively and efficiently which permits the human resources to be used as a means rather than the end. Among resources and systems, the HRM relies on to support the human resources in enhancing quality of products and services and improving performance and productivity of workers, which permits the human resources to be used as means rather than the end is technology. Slowly but gradually, technological systems and processes have taken over production and even important aspects of business such as innovation. Since HRM is unethical, it has gone ahead and integrated technology advancement in its culture despite the ramifications which includes lose of employment as technological systems and tools take over roles and responsibilities previously occupied by people. The consequences are financial and job insecurities and loss of jobs, which in turn results in lack of income and deteriorating standards of living for the unemployed who have lost their jobs to technology. If the HRM were ethical based on Kantian Ethics, it would device ways in which technology resources and human resources would operate cohesively which will ensure both the organization and the human resources achieve the ends and neither is used as a means for the ends of another as supported by Winstansley & Woodall (2000, p. 50). Nevertheless, HRM is ethical in that it invests in ensuring that at all times their own person, that is the organization and the person of others who in this case are the employees are at all time an end and never a means to an end. The HRM is charged with enhancing the growth and development of its labour forces. This is achieved through continuous learning where each individual is given an opportunity at work and away from work to sharpen their abilities and equip themselves with relevant knowledge and skills, which enhances their personal growth, and help them perform better and therefore, profit the organization. This means, through regular training and continuous learning opportunities provided for by HRM, they generate a win -win situation for all parties concerned as proposed by Kantian ethics. On the other hand, HRM is ethical because it ensures the right candidate is not only able to obtain the right job position but also, receive the right remunerations and benefits and at the same time, the organization is able to obtain the right candidate for the right job position and at the right cost (Budd & Scoville, 2005, p. 22). By obtaining the right candidate at the right cost and a candidate, obtaining the right job with the right price ensures both parties obtain the best end of the bargain where inputs are ethically equal to the outputs. The remunerations and benefits not only act as payment to services offered but they are essential to helping the employee meet their needs effectively, which is ethical. It would be unethical for a company to benefit immensely from the skills and knowledge of its workers while its workers are unable to make ends meet. Other illustrations that indicate HRM is ethical as far as making all persons ends rather than the means to an end is the aspect of actively and continuously engaging the labour forces in critical business processes particularly in decision making and problem solving. Modern HRM advocates and insists in communicating the goals of the business to the employees and engaging all parties in generating effective decisions to enhance performance and establishing mutually agreed relevant and effective ways of countering existing challenges. The concept of employee engagement ensures the views and insights from both sides are fairly presented and both are involved in devising techniques and strategies of attaining the ends and none is used as a means to achieve the desired ends (Winstansley & Woodall, 2000, p. 50). HRM is keen on bringing on board all the relevant stakeholders who includes the management, shareholders, investors and employees in understanding and owning changes generated during change management where both are engaged in facilitating change that benefits them both. By fostering employee growth and development through continuous learning and engaging them in critical business processes serves the purpose of empowering the employees, which demonstrates HRM as ethical since the intentions behind the ethical actions are aligned to moral law and do not serve self interests of one party. Conclusion Ethics plays a significant role in HRM since HRM involves social interactions, which integrate values, behaviours, attitudes, beliefs and perceptions of people, which are guided by moral laws. Advancing ethical HRM is easier said than done due to the conflict that exists between capital and labour relations. As argued in the report using Kantian Ethics theory, HRM is partially unethical and ethical. When it perceives its people as resources that helps achieve organizational goals and when it does ethical acts for self-interests, then it becomes unethical. On the other hand, when the intentions behind ethical decisions and actions conform to moral reason then HRM is ethical. References Budd, J.W., & Scoville, J.G. 2005. The ethics of human resources and industrial relations. London: Cornell University Press. Koster, M. 2007. Ethics in Human Resource Management. Berlin: GRIN Verlag. Kramar, R., Bartram, t., & De Cleri, H. 2011. Human resource management in Australia- Strategy, people, performance, 4th Ed. Sydney: McGraw-Hill. Mabey, C., Skinner, D., & Clark, T. 1998. Experiencing human resource management. London: SAGE. Schwartz, J. & TUC. 2007. Connecting agency and morality in Kant's moral theory. London: ProQuest. Sims, R.R. 2007. Human resource management: contemporary issues, challenges, and opportunities. New York: IAP. Storey, J. 2007. Human resource management: a critical text. Melbourne: EMEA. Winstansley, D., & Woodall, J. 2000. Ethical issues in contemporary human resource management. Sidney: Palgrave Macmillan. Read More