Strategic Management of an Organisation
There is a core shift in the responsibilities of the manager to the professional HR manager. Managers whose main job is HR, and who are abided in a HR department, are progressively more focusing on the broader strategic issues linked with managing people in organizations. HR managers, for instance, might be foreseeing the organization’s enduring hiring needs based on demands of company growth and proficiency requirements. Or they might be increasing organization-wide human resource information systems that trail all of the information concerning employees that used to be stored on paper in file drawers.
Or they can be bench marking company HR practices against industry competitors (Konrad, A. M. , and Linnehan, F. , 1999). All these are big, protracted jobs, and they do not leave HR managers much resource sagging to deal with the fundamental tasks (e. g. , hiring, firing, and training etc. ) that used to be the restricted area of the HR department. Fundamental HR activities are progressively more being decentralized and handed off to managers like line managers working front-and-center. That is a good thing, for the most part. After all, you are the one who is working with your employees’ day in and day out.
HR is an essential part of management stratagems with labour operation approaches imitating production and marketing main concern. The edifying term matching to include such an approach to HRM. They center on HRM as strategic integration. The exploit of setting up; a logical loom to the design and management of personnel systems based on an employment strategy and work force approach, and often strengthened by a ‘philosophy’; similar HRM actions and strategies to some precise business strategy; and considering the people of the association as a strategic resource for attaining competitive advantage.
Thus HR is a perspective on employment systems, characterized by their closer alignment with business strategy’. The elements of the corporate strategies that dominate the HR strategy vary. Certain organizational forms will find it virtually impossible to adopt strategic HRM, while foreign companies are more likely to adopt it. Sector and type of organization are the determining factors, with public sector and large, high visibility organizations further probable to take on strategic HR practices.
HR as choosing the right people, developing people, providing interrelated support systems, and keeping the best people for forming a talented workforce. Riotous changes have happened in the business environment, with excellence constantly considered one of management’s most competitive priorities and requirements for provisions and growth. Quality is a competitive prospect, not just a dilemma to be solved. Therefore, managers require stopping thinking about quality merely in relation to production process control and starting thinking about it thoroughly in relation to consumers’ demands and preferences.
Customers focused organizational culture, with aligned HR strategies and practices, are the means to successful strategy accomplishment. The HR management comprises key issue for business. As the notion of HR contain two core meanings. First, strategy of HRM focuses on the link between organizational strategies and HRM as a central theme. HRM has or does not have in the overall process of strategic decision making in the organization. Secondly, HRM can contain a strategic orientation of the HR function, i.
e. , the functional areas themselves (Ghoshal, S. and Westrey, D. E. , 1993). The subsistence of diverse HR strategies and on the strategic orientation in personnel planning or, in more detail, on the strategic orientation of different core functional areas of HR, e. g. , recruitment and selection, training and development, appraisal, and compensation are discussed. Much of the discussion is, presently, cantered on the first core implication (Chris Brewster, 2000).
Consistent with Woodd’s (1997) viewpoint that HRM should be the guardian of ethical values in employment, it used to be assumed that HR had a strong role in EEO as it was believed that this function inherently upheld desirable social justice values (Trice, Belasco, & Alutto, 1969). HR was always involved in selection processes, but, increasingly, together with the devolution of many HR responsibilities (Torrington & Hall, 1996), this role has assumed less importance; it has either been forgotten or thought to be unnecessary.
A number of authors may still view HRM as having a role in compliance with employment law and EEO/AA legislation. Certainly, on the positive side, research has found that the human resource function is the main driver of change on equity issues (Cattaneo, Reavley, & Templer, 1994), and even where there is support from senior managers, it has been found that diversity initiatives (the follow-on from EEO), have been driven by HRM (Miller & Rowney, 1999).
Moreover, it has been argued that one of the most significant effects associated with AA has been the elaboration of the HRM function (Konrad & Linehan, 1995). http://www. ifsam. org/2002/human-resource-management/bennington%20PUB. htm The pressures that environment creates do not bode well for those who believe that it is the role of the HR Manager to promote, if not ensure, compliance with the relevant legislation, especially if senior managers do not share the same views.
Yet, as Mello points out, the literature is “conspicuously silent concerning any examination or study of this potential conflict of interest” and goes on to quote the Code of Ethics of the Society for Human Resource Management which states that the HR Manager is “to make fair and equitable treatment of all employees a primary concern while simultaneously stating expectations to maintain loyalty to the employer, even while upholding all laws and regulations relating to the employer’s activities” (2000: 12).
In the U. K. , Collinson and Collinson (1996: 240) report that: “Attempts by personnel managers to ensure that recruitment practices were formal, consistent, and lawful were frequently undermined by divisions and conflicts based on function (between personnel and line): space (corporate/local); hierarchy (senior line manager/subordinate personnel); age; gender; and managerial ideology. ” http://www. ifsam. org/2002/human-resource-management/bennington%20PUB. htm
HRM is conveyed into the organizational strategy some relation to a formal forecast and prepares mode of strategy formulation, it makes two additional assumptions: formerly that this is solely a management concern; and secondly that, in spite of the debate about the role of line managers, the HR experts bring HR concerns into the strategic discussion. HRM participation can take many forms, from full association of the Board to the plan of achievement tactics for the delivery of strategic goals. The presence takes HRM issues into the strategic level discussions of linking one-third and one-half of the Board being legislature of the employees.
In many organizations in these countries the HRM role is basically confined to a managerial role. In other cases, the presence of a legally requisite Works Counsel on which employee legislature have considerable power, or invasive unionism, means that in practice the interests of the employees characteristic in all main operational decisions. The more traditional notions of strategy show high users are more likely to have a HR presence on the main decision making body of the organization, to have written organization strategies and written HR strategies (Jurgens, U.
, Malsch, T. and Dohse, K. 1993). The idea of strategy is far from simple or basic and needs to be treated with caution. Actually there is no precise point of determination of strategy and no straight link to implementation. A viewpoint that presumes that there is and that takes no account of the effects of actors’ processes and relative conditions, will lead inexorably to a verdict of absence of strategy. Formulation of strategy does not have effect it is much less overt, cognizant or planned than that entails.
The development of strategy is indeed a multifaceted, interactive, incremental and constrained process, so that classifying a point at which the corporate strategy can be is complex ‘completed’ adequately to permit the ‘HRM strategy’ to be formed. Strategic management is frequently asserted to be the area of human resource management which can make the greatest impact on organizational performance (Philpott and Sheppard 1992). The use of strategic management systems to execute strategy has also been viewed as a significant part of the strategy progression.
The role of HR management in overall organization performance has received transformed stress in current years, chiefly due to escalating competition, which has forced organizations to examine in detail the involvement of diverse parts of the business (Storey and Sisson 1993), and to extensive reformation initiatives, used to line up organizations more intimately with the marketplace, which have implicated devolution to business units and profit centres. In such conditions, responsibility and measurement become critical to effective operations.
Strategic management has acknowledged significant attention in the human resource management field, though less so in the strategy field, despite calls for increased study in the area (Simons 1994). The theoretical assistance can be classified into three broad areas. First, strategic management is viewed as a key integrative means, concerning individuals’ goals and responsibilities to the objectives of the business, and assimilating major interventions assessment, rewards, training, and development in that way assisting strategically fit.
Moreover, strategic management has been recognized for enhancing organizational control over employees, raising a constant statement of managerial expectations, and endorsing a unitarist vision of the firm. Moreover, strategic management is held to be a significant driver in shaping valuable outputs, such as employee assurance. Recognition by employees with the organization about observance to its values, goals, and desired behaviours is implicit to cause a strong culture and be favourable to organizational success.
The demands on strategic management systems to appraise precisely the contributions of employees are probable to boost substantially. The major component of the strategic management system: goal setting, evaluation, rewards, and training and development. Though, HR managers’ focus has transformed in those organizations where HR is a full business partner. Most dramatic is the improved attention to a cluster of activities with planning, managerial design, and organizational improvement.
Investigation of dissent shows that the focus on these activities has augmented more in those organizations in which HR is a full partner evaluated to those in which it is not. Likewise, the consideration to employee development activities, and particularly to career planning and management development, has increased drastically more in the companies that are full partners. Although there has been some enhancement in the focus on some of the more established HR functional activities such as recruitment, selection, compensation, and benefits, these changes are not statistically more prone to occur in businesses that are strategic partners.
Being a strategic partner goes hand in hand with splurging more time on organization planning, design, and development, and spending more time fitting the development actions of the organization to the business needs of the organization (Jackson, S. , Hitt, M. , & DeNisi, A. 2003, Gibb, S. , 2000). HR being more of a strategic partner, or whether the reverse holds; that is, once HR as a full partner it is asked to do more organizational design and development work. Our belief is that both possibly occur.
As HR shows more interest in and ability in organizational development, it gets more implicated in the strategy progression, and thus does more organizational design and improvement work. Briefly, a type of spiral develops in which more of one led to more of the other. Despite the exact causality here, the proof is clear that being a full partner entails being more active in the organizational design and development arena. References: • Jackson, S. , Hitt, M. , & DeNisi, A. (eds. ). (2003). Managing Knowledge for Sustained Competitive Advantage: Designing Strategies for Effective Human Resource Management.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. • Ghoshal, S. and Westrey, D. E. (eds) (1993) Organisation Theory and the Multinational Corporation, New York, St Martin’s Press. • Jurgens, U. , Malsch, T. and Dohse, K. (1993) Breaking from Taylorism, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. • http://www. ifsam. org/2002/human-resource-management/bennington%20PUB. htm • Konrad, A. M. , and Linnehan, F. , “Affirmative action: History, effects and attitudes,” In G. N. Powell (Ed. ), Handbook of Gender and Work, Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 1999, 429–452.
• Gibb, S. , “Evaluating HRM Effectiveness: The Stereotype Connection,” Employee Relations, 22 (1) (2000), 58–75. • Chris Brewster, New Challenges for European Human Resource Management, Wolfgang Mayrhofer, Michael Morley; Macmillan, 2000 • Woodd, M. , “Human Resource Specialists – Guardians of Ethical Conduct? ,” Journal of European Industrial Training, 21 (3) (1997), 110–116. • Trice, H. M. , Belasco, J. , and Alutto, J. A. , “The Role of Ceremonials in Organizational Behavior,” Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 23 (1969), 31–58.
• Torrington, D. , and Hall, L. , “Chasing the Rainbow: How Seeking Status through Strategy Misses the Point for the Personnel Function,” Employee Relations, 18 (6) (1996), 81–97. • Cattaneo, R. J. , Reavley, M. , and Templer, A. , “Women in Management as a Strategic HR Initiative,” Women in Management Review, 9 (2) (1994), 23–28. • Miller, G. E. , and Rowney, J. I. A. , “Workplace Diversity Management in a Multicultural Society,” Women in Management Review, 14 (7/8) (1999), 307–316. • Konrad, A. M. , and Linnehan, F.
, “Affirmative action: History, effects and attitudes,” In G. N. Powell (Ed. ), Handbook of Gender and Work, Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 1999, 429–452. • Mello, J. A. , “The Dual Loyalty Dilemma for HR Managers under Title VII Compliance,” SAM Advanced Management Journal, 65 (1) (2000), 10–15, 51. • Collinson, D. , and Collinson, M. , “Barriers to Employee Rights: Gender, Selection, and the Labor Process,” Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal, 9 (3) (1996), 229–249. • Philpott, L. , And Sheppard, L. ( 1992). “‘Managing for Improved Performance'”, in M.
Armstrong (ed. ), Strategies for Human Resource Management: A Total Business Approach. London: Kogan Page. • Storey and Sisson 1993, Managing Human Resources and Industrial Relations. Milton Keynes: Open University Press. • Simons, R. ( 1994). “‘How Top Managers Use Control Systems as Levers of Strategic Renewal'”, Strategic Management]ournal, 15/1-4: 169-89. • Snell, S. A. And Dean, J. W. ( 1992). “‘Integrated Manufacturing and Human Resource Management: A Human Capital Perspective'”, Academy of Management Journal, 35: 467-504.