Strategic Employment Relations - Assignment Example

Reflections on Strategic Employment Relations Reflection on weekly case study 7: Fall from Grace or Glass Ceiling. Zoe Cruz’s predicament on Lakshminarayanan’s (2011) case study: “Fall from Grace or Glass Ceiling” summarises some of the conventional arguments surrounding the issue of gender equality in the workplace, in this instance top management. I found the case study very interesting as unlike most other illustrations used in gender and ethics, the study offers rationalisations for as well as against Zoe Cruz’s position. On the one hand, from a preliminary reading, I got the impression of a no-nonsense strictly professional and determined woman who rapidly scales the corporate ladder of a very successful firm by being unrelenting and diligent. However, on the other hand, the case study also sheds light on what is apparently an abrasive personality, a calculating person who may have ascended to the top strategically at the expense of some of her workmates and employees. Therefore, while there is a case to be made for Zoe Cruz in terms of a glass ceiling, there is also a case to be made against her since it is naturally expected for anyone in her position, gender notwithstanding, to be willing to accept responsibility for their actions and be obliged to step down. Zoe Cruz’s case presents a challenging moral and ethical dilemma and demonstrates the difficulty in separating fact from value in the gender debate. The case study provided interesting material to ponder in the debate over whether it’s a man’s (working) world. Personally, while I tended to sympathise with the reality faced by women in terms of the glass ceiling and having to overcome gender stereotypes, Zoe Cruz’s situation represented a converse illustration of true gender equality. In the event that Zoe Cruz had been male, the same explanations in support of her dismissal would still have been relevant. High risk implies high rewards and had the decision to trade in mortgages paid off, she would have been handsomely rewarded. Therefore, in my opinion, it was more of a case of fall from grace. Reflection on Weekly Case study 5: “The Pittsfield Symphony: managing the arts in tough times” The case study, “The Pittsfield Symphony: managing the arts in tough times” portrays a good picture on the challenges associated with performance management especially during unfavourable economic conditions. This case study provides a good basis that can be used on the debate topic, “Performance management is more trouble than it’s worth.” I found this case study to be very insightful particularly with regards to matters relating to performance management. From the case study it is evident that Pittsfield Symphony is balancing the necessity to cut costs during economic recession and the need to maintain a high and quality performance. A critical review of this case study shows that, in the midst of an economic recession, Pittsfield Symphony uses performance management strategies that involve providing high remuneration and benefits to its employees. As seen in the case study, the use of this performance management strategy is very demanding and strenuous to the organisation due to the on-going financial recession. From my point of view, I do not think that this strategy is effective especially when it comes to enhancing the performance of orchestra. I personally find this strategy to be costly, demanding and inefficient. Despite the fact that the salaries paid to Pittsfield Symphony orchestra can be ranked in the top ten, the overall performance of the organization is wanting. For instance, the company’s administrative and promotion functions have yielded minimal results (Rubenfield & Yahr 2010). Therefore, it is plausible for one to argue that performance management is more trouble than it’s worth. Reflection on weekly case study 3: Core International Labour Standards and the World Trade Organisation Truscott et al (2007) make a very good attempt at being impartial in their case study of global labour standards. However, despite their best efforts, I was of the opinion that they slightly tilted towards the HICs (High Income Countries) argument and were subtly less supportive of the plight of Lower Income Countries (LICs). In debating whether globalisation is ultimately in the best interests of all workers, one must not simply look at the benefits hypothetically presented by the HIC position. While it may be true that it is beneficial to all workers to adopt the WTO global labour standards and allow them to enjoy higher wages, health and medical benefits and even vacations, one must bear in mind that realisation of such globalised standards is dependent on a countries’ position in the global economic hierarchy and this will (not might, will) tilt the scale against LICs even further. LIC s stand in a position of double disadvantage against HICs on the issue of global labour standards- not only are they historically and economically advantaged, but they also face a dilemma of ethics when it comes to providing and safeguarding the benefits that come with globalisation. From a normative standpoint, it is true that globalisation will definitely be in the best interests of all workers. It is naturally desirable for every worker to enjoy medical benefits and paid leave. However, global labour standards should be pursued only to the extent that they can be applied to everyone’s advantage and relaxed at times to allow LIC countries achieve some of their fundamental targets. For instance, imposing standards such as medical benefits, vacations and shorter working hours in some LICs may lead to unemployment as few employers will find such arrangements sustainable. It is also difficult to define concepts such as child labour and doubly difficult to monitor and enforce especially in communal societies in LICs. Eroding the competitive advantage of LICs in trade will only preserve the status quo. Therefore, I do not support the argument that globalisation is ultimately in the best interests of all workers since the playing field id definitively not level. Reflection on Weekly Case study 6: Strategic Recruiting: A Human Resource Management Case Study. Over the years it has been argued that management is solely the work on managers. I strongly believe that although managers play a huge role in the management of an organization’s operations, each member of the work force can take up managerial roles in different tasks and contribute to the company’s performance of the organization. The case study on strategic recruiting Mid West Education Inc portrays that employee in an organization , regardless of whether they are managers or not, can take leadership initiatives and help the realise its goals. After reviewing this case, I support the motion that management is the responsibility of everyone, not just managers. Generally, this case study describes the current problems that the Mid West Education Inc faces as it seeks to transition from ad hoc recruitment practices to planned strategically aligned processes. One of the key strategies that the company hopes to use so as to find qualified candidates is employee referral. In this case the employees in the company will refer suitable candidates to the company. Evidently the company’s employees will play a critical role in the company’s recruitment process. This goes to show that management is the responsibility of everyone, not just managers (Murray & Fischer 2010). Reflection on weekly case study 4: Collective Bargaining Case Studies My initial impression of Slocombe’s (1986) case studies on collective bargaining was that it is very complex, bordering on confusing. It is easier to contrast the case studies and to compare them, and the situations discussed in each appear on face value to be fundamentally different from each other. However, there are a few essential lessons in management to be learned and the case studies are a fairly accurate description of reality in industrial labour relations. For instance, the third and the fifth case study emphasize that union-management relationships naturally have the potential to be extremely antagonistic and this antagonism is often counter- productive in collective bargaining. What Slocombe seems to be emphasizing is that while it is often tricky and challenging for union-management correspondence in the course of collective bargaining to be amicable and for both parties to approach the bargaining process with willingness to compromise, the ultimate outcome of the process is primarily determined by management’s responses to the situation as it develops much more than the unions’. In the debate about good faith in collective bargaining, I do believe it is possible from Slocombe’s analysis of the lessons learnt from the case studies. The common thread running through the cases of successful or less acrimonious collective bargaining processes in the first and the fourth cases was that management made a conscious effort to include employees in decision making processes and tactfully channelled their input into the process. While the strategy may vary, such as good negotiation technique in the first case or through research in the last case, the ability to have less acrimonious bargaining processes was dependent on management’s discretionary choice of appropriate strategy to allow employees to feel involved, influential and subsequently they and the union were less militant in the process. But when employees feel distanced from decision making, such as in the third case, it may prove extremely difficult to have bargaining in good faith. Bibliography Lakshminarayanan, S 2011, “Fall From Grace or Glass Ceiling,” Journal of Business Case Studies, Vol.6, No. 6, pp 61-69. Murray, L. & Fischer, A., 2010, Strategic Recruiting: A Human Resource Management Case Study, Journal of Business Case Studies 6(6), pp. 97-102. Rubenfield, R., Yahr, M. , 2010 “The Pittsfield Symphony: managing the arts in tough times” Journal business cases and application. Retrieved on March 13, 2012 from Slocombe, C.S 1986, “Collective Bargaining Case Studies”, Personnel Journal Vol. 18, pp 92-113. Truscott, M.H, Brust, P.J & Fesmire, J.M 2007, “Core International Labour Standards and the World Trade Organisation,” The Journal of Business Cases and Applications, Winter 2007, pp 1-6. Part B Strategic Employment Relations The overall goal of strategy is to direct and influence an organisation as it carries out its activities. Despite the fact that there is no model answer, there are many definitions of strategy (Gennard & Judge 2005). For instance, Tyson (1995) describes strategy as the attempts by an organisation to find ways of positioning their organizational objectives or business in order to exploit the planning environment and capitalise the future use of the organisation’s human assets and capital. On the other hand, Johnson and Scholes (2003) define strategy as the scope and direction of an organisation so as to meet the needs of the market over the long term. Based on this two definitions, it is evident that strategy mainly accentuates on; the long-term direction of an organization, the achievement of a competitive advantage in the market and is concerned with the scope of an organisation’s operations. Hence, strategic employment relations sets out what needs to be done or changed in the way in which an organisation manages its relationship with the work force so as to meet the long-term organizational goals and maintain a competitive edge in a constantly changing market (Armstrong 2006). Theories revolving around strategic employment relations can either be described as ‘hard’ or ‘soft’ theories. According to the ‘hard’ approaches employees are primarily viewed as means of realising organisational goals. In this case emphasise is laid on tasks, employee’s quantitative output, compliance and the development of the organization. On the other hand, the soft approaches favour flexibity, quality, commitment and motivation. It is more strategic and long-term (Analoui 1999). This approach is viewed as a form of ‘developmental humanism’ where employees are regarded as assets whose creative and intellectual skills contribute to the organisation’s competitive advantage. In practise, most organisations implement both the ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ approaches. Due to the diverse nature of organisations and business environments, there is no universal blueprint on the best strategic employment relations. Instead, organizations need to employ strategies that are suitable for particular organisational contexts or business environments (Legge 1995). Some researchers depict that strategic employment relations are increasingly dominated by hard HRM practices. For instance, some of the strategic elements of strategic employment relations used by most companies include; performance appraisals, rewards, motivation, training and development among many others. For instance, motivation and performance aims at achieving the strategic goals of employment relations and the overall organization through monitoring, assessing and rewarding performance (Armstrong 2006). Nevertheless, it is worth noting that strategic employment relations not only touch on the management approach of employers but also the role of unions and the state. It accentuates on the legitimate role of collective bargaining, conflict of interest and third parties within the employment relationship. Moreover, strategic employment relations not only analyses the multiple levels of employee relations but also the state and union interaction. It portrays a pluralist approach that accentuates on the roles of employers, unions as well as the state. In addition to this, strategic employment relations contribute to public policy in industrial relations areas and labour markets (Sisson 1993; Legge 1995). Bibliography Armstrong, M., 2006, A handbook of Human Resource Management Practice, Kogan Page Publishers, London. Analoui, F. (1999). Strategic Human Resource Management: Towards Constructing a Choice Model. Conference on Human Development Practices and Practitioners: Beyond the Year 2000, 27-28 May, Development and Project Planning Centre, University of Bradford. Gennard, J. & Judge, G., 2005, Employee relations, CIPD Publishing, London. Johnson, G. & Scholes, K., 2003, Exploring Corporate Strategy, 6th ed., Prentice Hill, London. Legge, K., 1995, Human Resource Management: Rhetoric and Realties, Macmillan, London. Sisson, K.,1993, In search of HRM. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 31 (2), 201–210. Tyson, S., 1995, Human resource strategy, Pitman Publishing, London. Read More