Essentials of Contemporary Management
Nevertheless, research has shown that control is not lost within the process, as It is already imposed in the employees themselves rather than the system. Ultimately, human resource management promises freedom and autonomy based on the commitment of employees, but it unconsciously practicing control within self-made consensus norms. Peter Trucker first used the term Human Resource Management in the sass’s as another term for personnel management. However, it was not until the sass’s when Human Resource Management meant a new philosophy in the management of employees (Henderson 2011).
By the sass’s, Tailor’s scientific method dominated the organization of work. Tailor’s Industrial practices utilized the developments of genealogy and pushed for maximum output from workers. Jobs were divided Into small fixed tasks with fixed discipline. Moreover, simplifying and standardizing procedures maximized the productivity. Due to the simplifying of Jobs, knowledge and skills were not necessary required. His reward system of “a fair days pay for a fair days work” was believed to be the main motivation to work.
Additionally, as workers were naturally assumed to slack off, managers were to decide and plan Job duties with precise details, also known as, “task Ideas”, which eliminated unnecessary actions and prevented the soldiering of workers.
Need essay sample on "Essentials of Contemporary Management"? We will write a custom essay sample specifically for you for only $ 13.90/page
As technology developed and markets were more competitive, the traditional system of work organizations was unable to produce quality outputs necessary to compete In the global market. Of the time, the rise of the Japanese manufactures and their successes in the electronic and motor sectors brought the cost of faith to the use of Forbids and Tailor’s industrial practices. Capitalization was the vanguard of a movement that developed fundamental changes of the capitalist industrial world (Storey 1992).
The reorganization of organizational and job structures post-Tailoring increased employee’s control over the production process, allowing employees to take responsibility over their work. The unlearnt perspective of Zooplankton had a purpose common to all members, of which It Included workers. Everyone shared the same interest in a high level of efficiency, ultimately generating rewarding profit (Henderson 2011 Moreover, work attitudes were positive and more rewarding to employees.
In addition, the provision of Job security, welfare services, and training programs integrated members of the organizations in an inclusive enterprise community that supports employees and provides security reluctant in taking holidays, as they were very committed to their Jobs and penchant for after hour socializing with co-workers. The effects of Aspirations were successful: there were low strikes, absenteeism, and turnover rates (Lincoln and Eagleburger 1992). Workers were committed to their work with high productivity and reduction quality giving Japanese corporations success in expanding outside their country.
In 1975, three out of the ten largest banks were Japanese, and by 1987 the number had increased to seven banks. Japanese bank were expanding overseas and manufacturing facilities settled down in the United Kingdom. The development of technology has also marked the need for continuous learning and training of employees. Hence, the increasing competition in the market and development of technology had led managers of other parts of the world to change their mind-set from production-oriented traditions to market-oriented traditions (Storey 1992). The
Japanese inspired models were accepted and replaced Tailor’s practices in the west; quality was emphasized in total quality management with the goal of a ‘no wasteful’ just-in-time production of precision, and interdependence. Moreover, Lean production systems combined both craft production and mass production achieved a very high level of commitment by employees. It eliminated wasteful movements and shifted responsibilities to employees themselves (Henderson 2011). The rise of the service occupations has placed emphasis on the importance of customer and services provided by employees.
White in 1946 quoted, “When workers and customers meet… Hat relationship adds new dimension to the pattern of human relations in the industry. ” (Corking 2013). Customer oriented organization such as call centers have to be efficient with standardized customer services. This is a strong indicator of the importance of employees in call centers. Reports form the United States and other industrial countries have indicated changes in the methods of managements. Moreover, organizational structures and cultures have adopted a new philosophical perspective, the Human Resource Management.
Organizations have fewer hierarchical levels, fewer Job classifications, and completely new approaches n their attitudes towards employees (Storey 1992). Richard Wallow’s article in the Harvard Business Review has shown these radical changes of management in workplaces has shifted from control to commitment (Walton 1985). Weber described the relationships between employers and employees to be treated from adversarial, to cooperatives, which encouraged workers to see themselves as part of the corporate (Lincoln and Eagleburger 1990). The Human Resource Management can be traced back to the Human Relations Movements from sass’s.
Topics of participation, communication, and effective leadership were highly associated with scholars of the Neo Human Relations School, McGregor, Liker, Blake and Herbert. Furthermore, Herbage argued that employees were more motivated to higher level of commitment to their Job by interesting work and skill development rather than reward and pay (CHIP 2003). The first signs of Human Resource Management revealed when corporate began to care for the welfare of employees. Academy appointed welfare officers to observe the lives of their employees (Henderson 2011).
Rather than motivational factors in performances of task, rewards were given to employees who were loyal, shared common values, and integrated themselves into increasing concern as to how individuals performed in Job tasks and developed strategies. Policies have also changed, where internalized commitment of employees is heavily emphasized. There are new cultural and development policies that advocated participation. Edwards noted that predominately coercive methods of labor control and bureaucratic control systems have evidently shown inefficiency.
The scales of enterprise, production technology, natures of markets, and worker resistance have progressed beyond the pre-dominating system (Lincoln and Killable 1990). The Human Resource Management is regarded as vital to the survival and success of corporate. It values the skills, knowledge, and creativity of their workers as the key assets for growth and success organizations. Peter Trucker in 1993 refers to the contemporary market as a knowledge based economy (Henderson 2011). The key difference between personnel management and HARM is that personnel management is compliance based and human resource management is commitment based. Unman resource management demands the minimization of what it can utilities whereas personnel management attempts to minimize cost (Henderson 2011). Moreover, human resource management is more business-oriented and integrated approach that emphasizes on the resources “sees the employee as an asset that should be valued in the same way than other assets such as factories or inventories are valued… Treatment of human asset and their valuation, acquisition and disposal call for new rules and strategies. ” (Storey 1992).
There are two versions of human resource management; The hard human resource management values the importance of forward planning, environmental scanning, and the integration of managerial actions with business goals. It is a quantitative approach that manages human resources as an economic factor in production (Henderson 2011). However, contemporary human resource management gravitates to the soft approach. This approach roots from the Human Relations School that focuses on communications, motivations and leadership of corporate community.
The psychological contract is a framework that advocates soft human resource management. It focuses on the humanistic perspective of management. Ultimately, It is the perception of managers and employees of what their mutual obligations are towards each other (CHIP 2003). It is also the relationship between employees and employers on the beliefs and trust that they honor the agreement made. The psychological contract is argued to be more influential than formal contracts. When a psychological contract is positive, the commitment and satisfaction given by employees will more likely to have a positive impact on the organization.
Similarly to Capitalization system, the psychological contract provides employees with Job security and opportunity in return for commitment and loyalty. Job satisfaction secures a change in attitude towards work in employees. Soft human resource management focuses on the individualistic approach rather than collective and the outcome is substantial or organizational outcomes (Henderson 2011). In such a demanding and competitive economy, the key to survival will be from the commitment and contributions from employees. For example, in 1986 Austin Rover attempted to shift the approach to labor management.
The manufacturing director Andy Barr introduced a wholesale change programmer, “Working with pride”. He also raised quality of production by gaining not rely on the practice of communication through union representatives. Manufacturing employees were separated amongst zones. The zones served to facilitate identifications with a team to create a sense of belonging. The change was successful as there was high level of involvement with work, satisfactions with training programs. Workers have taken responsibilities for painting and refurbishment of their work area, showing a sense of pride for their work.
In addition, new recruits have to pass through test and screenings, which increase the competition for commitment (Storey 1992). The emergence of corporate culture also promoted ideologies to encourage and motivate creativity from employees. Using Deuterium’s ideology of the creation of moral order, organizational culture provides a guide of identifications, and set standards to acceptable actions and ethics through life systems such as mission statements. Druthers recognized the importance of moral influence and authority as societies shift from mechanical to organic form of solidarity.
Sharing the same concern of social malady, it encourages dedications to work rather than accept perfunctory performances (Lincoln and Eagleburger 1990). Moreover, Williamson explained that organizations are systems to which employees are constitutionally attached to. For instance, Ford Motor Company published mission values and guiding principles in mission statements to build understanding and commitment amongst their employees (Storey 1992). Ultimately, the commitment and interest of workers prevents guileful behavior, which can cause markets to fail (Lincoln and Eagleburger 1990).
Weber and Faculty both predicted that future organizational life will be more rationalized and controlled. It is important to note that the power of the management has not been lost, rather in relation to Lake’s 3rd dimension of power, it has reformed in the new policies and retain control through values, relational attachment, and ideologies. (Storey 1992) Moreover, despite the fact that Capitalization theories promoted efficiency, there are downsides to the model. As susceptibilities were transferred to employees, stress levels were high. The sacrifice of individual freedom for career development is evident.
In the contemporary Human Resource Management model, power and control has not been disoriented. It is less apparent and concealed in corporate policies and valued norms. There has been a shift in the dynamics of control, from the control of managers in management to workers themselves who, “collaborate to develop the means of their own control. ” (Storey 1992). Conceptive control denotes the consensus behavior of employees according to agreed core values of the organization. In additional to Edwards three level of control, conceptive control is seen in modern management.
It is argued to be the most powerful control than previous bureaucratic, simple and technical controls. It is less apparent, but more difficult to resist upon. Self-managing teams is argued to allow companies to become more productive and competitive, allowing employees to be responsive and committed. However, it has permitted Weeper’s iron cage of rules based on rational control become much more strict. For example, a small manufacturing company in America, ELSE Communications, converted from traditional manufacturing system to self-managing system in 1988. They strives to keep up in a market of competition and innovation.
The market also increasingly demanded initiated to convert the production department into three different teams and increased the pace of training in teamwork, self-supervision and Just in Time manufacturing. The employees as a team, had to learn to take responsibility and ownership for the team’s successes and failures. Each of them negotiated and worked harder and was noticeably committed to their tasks. They have set on consensus rules, regulations, and values. These value-based interactions became a silent social force that controlled their actions and decision-making.
Power and authority has transferred from managements, to team’s value norms. However, these value norms were rationalized. It made them purposeful, functional but also controlled. Self-management increased the control by making their own-shared valued rules. Moreover, shared rules have put workers under the test of their own rules. It has become disciplines to ensure control over individuals and actions made. Constant and heighten stress is visible as there are constant eyes on each other. Workers, risking human dignity, had to identify themselves strongly in the team and acknowledge consensus values and goals.
If not, they are not seen as a part of the team. They had become trapped in Weeper’s iron cage of bureaucratic control. Workers and managers engage in informal and formal negotiations of which outcomes of organizational strategies are developed. They continued to rationalize rules and values into structured forms. As such, power and control have not been lost, but rather more power and less apparent (Barker 1999). Contemporary management focuses on human resource development ideologies and emphasize enormously on the commitment and trust of employees.
The former management ideals that succeeded in Tailor’s industrial properties could not persist in the competitive and technological advanced economy of the twenty-first century. Human Resource Management concentrates upon individuality rather than the collectivities of employees, to whom they are provided with career development in return for commitment and loyalty. Decision-making and responsibilities is thus passed from management to employees. However, research has shown that power and control is not lost in the adjustment of human resource management.