Comparative Employee Relations: The UK and France - Essay Example

 Introduction Employee relations strategies across the world vary differently, sometimes radically, based on pre-determined scenarios within the organization as well as cultural differences that reside at the foundational civilian level. Employee relations deal with the improvement of relationships between employer and worker, using a multitude of strategies that include better human resource practices, building a stronger foundation of human capital, and motivating workers to perform to organisational standards. The United Kingdom and France have different strategies used to improve employee relations, however both nations work consistently at creating a linkage between satisfying employees and achieving organisational goals. A comparison between UK and France The United Kingdom has a very Westernised approach to improving employee relations, much of which is built on the Americanised model of business that involves empowerment strategies for workers, improving cultural sensitivity, and improving technical and communication skills for better relationships between the organisation and the employee. In the UK, globalisation has driven many of these employee relations policies that are often directly linked to human resources; a form of partnership. Friedman (2007) identifies that such values that create HR linkages in employee relations strategies include building innovation through training, learning cultural sensitivity, and often adopting global business trends common in industrialised nations. Globalisation has evolved UK employee relations in such a way that a partnership between HR and line management cannot be dismissed. As one example, many companies in the UK have realised that childcare is a significant issue for workers, especially when job role responsibilities become more diverse and employees must be especially devoted to their organisational role and remain committed to achieving long-term objectives. A recent survey identified that the establishment of childcare vouchers, offering tax and national insurance relief, improves staff turnover by up to 29 percent (Vevers, 2007). This is especially important in organisations that sustain expatriate leadership to help support business objectives or when the working hours exceed normal operating hours. Childcare vouchers create a partnership with human resources as it motivates improved performance in the worker receiving the new employee relations benefit and aligns the corporate benefits division with ongoing HR support for the objective. In France, there is a structured collectivist mentality in the broader social culture that drives much of the business decision-making that occurs on a daily basis in business operations. Collectivist cultures place significant emphasis on group belonging and demands loyalty for the in-group. Collectivists “view themselves as a member of an extended family where group interests are often placed ahead of individual needs” (Blodgett, Bakir & Rose, 2008, p.339). This cultural aspect of society often drives business decision-making in which teamwork methodology is part of the long-term strategic goals that drive daily operations. Collectivist mentality has created, as part of employee relations, more 360-degree feedback systems in which employees are appraised by not only their immediate supervision, but by peer employees, extended line leadership, and sometimes even the customer. Again, as with the United Kingdom, establishing a group-minded performance appraisal system links employee relations directly with human resources in order to promote conformity and also to improve employee learning by assessing the employee using feedback from multiple sources. The role of the human resources manager becomes more complex in this type of system as interactions occur between extended business management and also consultation with external clients that drive business profitability. France also has industrial business structures that are decentralized, structures where more authority is given to low-level employees and where employees are empowered as decision-making is filtered throughout the business instead of at the top tiers of executive leadership. In this type of organisation, “decisions can be made more quickly and employees believe there is more procedural fairness” (Carpenter, Bauer & Erdogan, 2010, p.1). This is likely a by-product of the collectivist cultures that drive France society and business management principles, however it is much different than most UK organisations that often still have very structured, vertical, and centralised decision-making hierarchies. In this case, in France, decentralised business as part of the corporate norm builds greater judgement capabilities in workers as decision-makers and improves productivity. Decentralisation in France assists in building more dedicated employees capable and motivated to achieve organisational goals and also includes human resources as an ongoing function rather than a once-yearly appraisal that stems from the HR management team. As with the United Kingdom, where annual appraisals are common, France uses its daily decentralisation mentality so that HR becomes a routine function of employee and management interaction to improve collectivist strategy and enhance motivation whilst also reducing turnover from dissatisfied employees. The end result is improved profitability, more global competitiveness, and the construction of a more qualified human capital team. In the UK, outsourcing and sub-contracting is becoming more popular as a cost-savings tool and also to diversify knowledge and skills by using recruited temporary employees or specialised labour professionals. In larger organisations where global competition is standard and where marketed goods are offered to overseas consumers, outsourcing can create negative emotions in employees and make them less motivated to perform to organisational standards. Tapiola (2002) identifies that outsourcing can create a poor image of business loyalty toward employees and concern workers about their own job stability, sometimes leading to higher turnover rates. Even though the business is satisfying profit objectives, it provides less opportunities for growth for employees when job roles are filled with outsourced employee help. In this type of UK business, unsatisfied employees become a function of human resources to build new strategies to enhance motivation and loyalty toward achieving organisational goals. Thus, businesses that outsource in the UK rely on human resource managers as partners to develop new reward schemes, such as pay-for-performance schemes, and monitor their success to avoid ongoing problems with employee dissatisfaction related to outsourcing and temporary help. In France, performance appraisals are ongoing and routine functions of business to help employees identify with their strengths and weaknesses and also to assist in the development of more competent workers. “Organisations need to regularly and systematically audit, evaluate and continually improve their performance appraisal systems” (Wilson & Western, 2001, p.93). The function of employee relations is to improve relationships between employer and employee, however this could not be effectively accomplished without the intervention of HR professionals needed to monitor and evolve these systems as the business itself evolves over time. These appraisals can include any type of measurement criteria that is unique to the business and its goals, such as giving credit or pay increases with the receipt of different training packages. However, the differences between the UK and France are clear in this situation: France’s collectivist culture demands group loyalty and affiliation, therefore the partnership with human resources becomes standardised in most industrial organisations rather than a periodic function as found in the UK. In order for a performance appraisal system to be effective, it requires ongoing assessment by leadership in HR that is capable of identifying the needs of employees at the psychological level. This is unrealistic to expect of line leadership, such as those who deal with routine daily line leadership or collective bargaining for different trade unions. Instead, it requires individuals in human resources that have been educated and trained in human needs development and psychological training in motivation. This shows that partnership between HR simply as a matter of removing burden from line managers that are already overwhelmed by basic job responsibilities and other employee relations activities. In difficult economies, such as that experienced today in the UK, buy-outs are becoming more common as the business attempts to cut its labour costs and streamline organisational structure to be more lean in terms of volume of employees. However, such buy-outs often consolidate job roles and make the responsibilities of current employees more difficult and complex. It often leads to increases in training for the remaining employees to manage consolidated job roles. A recent study on UK buy-out impact as related to employee relations identified that it often leads to more employee involvement, increases in organisational training, and sometimes pay level increases (Bruining, Boselie, Wright & Bacon, 2005). However, this creates concerns about remaining employees’ job stability and job security as the workforce is reduced through cost-cutting buy-out philosophy. In many ways, it erodes the psychological contract between employee and employer, creating problems with the social environment and sometimes the opportunities for career development. This is why the management of an organisation where buy-outs are commonplace relies on human resources partnerships to assist in creating better job content, improving the work and private life balance, and creating new opportunities for promotion or development in the midst of staff reduction efforts. In France, the notion of the psychological contract as a means to motivate deals with improving financial compensation, such as offering bonus structures, so that workers are more motivated to achieve strategic, long-term goals. Workers in France demand flexible working hours as well as the receipt of challenging job tasks (Van de Ven, 2004). As with other business scenarios, this is likely a product of the collectivist culture that drives France society and management principles. Unlike the UK, this is much less a product of globalisation and is more driven by the social attitudes found prevalent in the country. Therefore, it is the social attitudes that require a partnership between human resources professionals and employee relations to consistently evolve job content, build respect for employees and their personal lives, and develop different bonus structures that can be adjusted as the business itself changes over time. It is unrealistic to believe that line leadership can handle this multi-dimensional element of building more motivated and satisfied employees, therefore there must be a separate business division skilled in supporting the psychological contract in order to create long-lasting and positive results. Pay-for-performance schemes are often utilised in organisations in the United Kingdom and this has improved employee relations and built more motivation for achieving organisational goals. However, this is likely a product of the more individualistic culture that is found in the UK in which personalised talent and assistance toward meeting goals is appreciated and rewards are distributed with much less of a group-inclusive mentality. However, in order to manage an evolving pay-for-performance scheme, it requires human resources professionals that can dedicate their time and talents to changing bonus structures to meet with current job role activities and employee attitudes as well. The UK seems to find considerable synergies with these types of schemes and the partnership between business leadership and HR is undeniable as part of routine business function. However, a recent French survey identified that only 24 percent of respondents believed that pay-for-performance schemes actually build better employee retention in the UK (Williams, 2009). The same survey also identified that only 12 percent of respondents believed it had any potential for improving recruitment ratios (Williams). This could be a product of cultural bias as, again, related to the collectivist lifestyle that drives France’s business practices. Workers in France, instead, seem to appreciate group rewards that are part of routine business promises as included in the psychological contract, those that include more autonomy and decision-making authority and a better, cohesive social environment. This is why the partnership between HR and business leadership is quite different in the UK as compared to France as the end result of better motivation, retention, or even recruitment is more noticeable in the United Kingdom when using pay-for-performance schemes. Globalisation has driven more awareness of cultural principles as businesses become more engaged with marketing, distribution or alliances with corporations across the world. The UK, being much more industrialised than France, is more successful in promoting and training cultural awareness than in France. Global trends seem to drive UK employee relations policies much more than in France where the collectivist lifestyle drives the majority of decentralized business practices and the method by which HR professionals develop new motivational strategies. However, it is important to note that cultural sensitivity and diversity are very much a part of the employee relations and human resources strategies in both countries, however at a much different level for both nations. Business resourcing for the global organisation requires professionals from diverse cultural, lifestyle and ethnic backgrounds, therefore there must be some presence of human resources management to ensure that diversity policies are developed and employees understand cross-cultural understanding in their daily social environment. The evolution of employee relations strategies internationally requires the involvement of HR in this type of organisation where foreign staffing is a reality. Conclusion It is clear that there are many similarities and differences between how UK and France-based businesses structure their employee relations and human resources strategies. The main difference, as identified through the research, is the collective versus individualistic cultures that are found in both nations. There is much more reliance on HR in France (so it seems) in order to retain and motivate employees based on the establishment of decentralised business function to improve autonomy and decision-making power in lower-ranking employee groups. The UK, in comparison, seems to have developed a more flexible mentality for enhancing employee relations than in France, such as through the childcare voucher or creating reward schemes that target the individual’s accomplishments rather than setting group reward systems. In any case, both the UK and France have well-developed employee relations schemes for boosting employee motivation and support (in terms of loyalty) for achieving strategic goals. There is evidence of a strong partnership between leadership and human resources in both countries even if the methodology behind these strategies differs based on cultural norms or global influence. References Blodgett, J., Bakir, A. & Rose, G. (2008). A test of the validity of Hofstede’s cultural framework, The Journal of Consumer Marketing. 25(6), p.339. Bruining, H., Boselie, P., Wright, M. & Bacon, N. (2005). The impact of business ownership change on employee relations: buy-outs in the UK and in Europe, The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 16(3). Carpenter, M., Bauer, T. & Erdogan, B. (2010). [internet] Principles of management. [accessed 3.2.2011 from http://www.flatworldknowledge.com/pub/1.0/principles-management/29065] Friedman, B. (2007). Globalisation implications for human resource management roles, Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal. 19(3), pp.157-168. Tapiola, K. (2002). Core labour standards and globalisation, Standards and Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, International Labour Office, Geneva, p.3. Van de Ven, C. (2004). [internet] The psychological contract: a big deal?, Behavioural Sciences Service Centre. [accessed 3.2.2011 from http://www.internationalmta.org/documents/2004/2004024p.pdf] Vevers, S. (2007). Creating a buzz, Personnel Today. September 11, pp.28-30. Williams, N. (2009). Performance-related pay hit during recession, Personnel Today. November 3, p.23. Wilson, J. & Western, S. (2001). Performance appraisal: an obstacle to training and development?, Career Development International, Bradford. 6(2/3), p.93. Read More