Human Resources Mangers Roles and Contributions in Merger Processes - Term Paper Example

Introduction Conventionally, HR profession could hinge mainly and conceptually on employee morale, employee turnover, and employee commitment. Moreover, the HR function if frequently perceived as an expense-generator and an administrative function, rather than a value-added partner. This has made a majority of HR professionals within the HR to express their disappointment over the lack of respect and acknowledgement for the services that they avail. Several forces congregate to support the notion that HR management should take a significant strategic focus in most organizations. Most recent articles have argued that HR management can be a critical source of competitive advantage if it becomes strategic. The paper explores the strategic function of HR and the core practices and outlines outcomes of HR practices. Ulrich’s model avails new opportunities to HR function as the need for a more strategic and business-linked is evident. This emanates from the fact that corporations are experiencing dramatic changes that manifest significant implications based on how critical human resources are to their performance. Several studies have explored the capability for the HR function to be a strategic partner and established that it possesses a critical value-adding function. HR function should become strategically proactive and goes beyond mere administrative expertise. HR function should be an expert in strategic business partnering, employee advocacy, and change management (Robinson and Robinson 2008, p.203). A well structured strategic business partner role combined with an effective delivery of operational HR functions can aid in transforming of the HR function. Human Resource as a discipline has manifested considerable changes within the last two decades with phrases such as “business partner” becoming common. Given the present turbulent nature of the business world and the resultant demands on human capital, the strategic business partner role can deliver value to organizations (Caldwell 2001, p.39). The establishment of strategic business role emanates from a combination of possessing skills and knowledge within the arena of Human Resources, organization development, and partnership. Nevertheless, once the competence profile is established, it is also critical to comprehend the usual tensions as the organization moves from their present HR state to the utilization of a strategic business model (Price 2007, p.55). The Strategic Business Partner Role The strategic business partner (SBP) concept should be structured around availing human capital organization change perspectives entrenched within business leadership teams. For strategic business partners need to be effective, they will need to manifest business credibility, the capability to work in partnership with other leaders within the organization, and deep HR and organization functional knowledge. The SBP model represents a way to guarantee that the human system implications and the needed changes are part of business leadership decisions (Ulrich 1997, p.89). Strategic business partnering incorporates centres on strategic thinking, cultural change, organizational design, human system alignment, and change management (Wofford 2002, p.136). The context, demands, and characteristics of any industry or organization sector mainly drive the role of strategic business partner. The contemporary business world can be regarded as hyper-turbulent, and organizations must adapt to multiple unparalleled challenges that alter the way in which organizations are run. The realities of the modern business world encompass conducting business 24/7, globally across multiple cultural boundaries, and maintaining pace with the registered changes in technology. All of the outlined changes have significant human capital implications, besides raising the significance of strategic HR thinking. It is in this context that one can conceptualize the role of strategic business partner based on an outside-in approach that takes into account the present and future challenges of the organization (Vogelsang 2013, p.22.). The strategic business partner should be capable of joining with other business leaders in analyzing the strategic implications of the rapid, distinct changes driving the sector, organization, or industry. Background Over the last two decades, the function and structure of the HR function within organizations has been significantly been debated, and undergone a significant transformation. Dave Ulrich’s ground-breaking model of human resources services delivery motivated many senior HR to structure, and restructure the delivery of their to satisfy the challenges of altering national and international business conditions. In the book, Ulrich argued that the function of the HR professional ought to be redefined to satisfy the competitive challenges that organizations face. The forms and intensity of global changes influencing organizations are increasingly having significant capital implications in both strategy and operations. In this platform, the strategic business partner role becomes critical and can add a significant value. HR has been undergoing a significant deal of change rendering a rise in strategic significance and profile; continuous re-structuring, re-labelling, and re-defining; outsourcing parts, roles, undertakings, or in some instances all of HR department; highlighting more on competencies and certifications, education and training; and critical debate on re-defining what HR should be (Ulrich and Brockbank 2005, p.278). Nevertheless, despite the many years of rhetoric regarding business partner with an “a place at the table” where business decisions that matter are made a majority of human resources professionals are hardly there. Tactical areas of HR in compliance or administrative encompass aspects such as risk management (legal, and regulatory requirements, legal defence, compliance, and cost containment), employee relations (supervision and policy issues), and day-to-day operations such as overseeing employment, benefits, and payroll. The logic behind this is that when the tactical areas are managed effectively, then the business partner has time and resources to respond to the human capital issues that influence the business strategically (Becker, Huselid and Ulrich 2001, p.213). Organizations frequently attempt to separate the tactical and strategic forms of HR work into diverse roles or units. Once separated, organizations then attempt to enhance training with the objective of building skills for the generalists, and business partners, as well as other senior HR advisors engaging in strategy and change. Some of The impediments to this realization have been how roles and units are designed, the client-friendliness of processes and training adequacy for HR and internal users (Robinson and Robinson 2005, p.2). It is also essential to note that theoretically, the generic business partner role may not be configured as meticulously as a strategic business partner. HR Business Partnering or Strategic Partners HR business partnering details the process by which Human Resource professionals carry out their mandate closely with business leaders, to attain shared organizational objectives. Business partners, in this case, represent senior or chief HR professionals and are mainly tied to the business unit to impact and steer strategy implementation (Yeung and Berman 1997, p.321). Research has indicated that the function of business partners differs broadly between organizations with factors such as organizational size, company culture, and business priorities emerging to determine the manner in which business partner role are undertaken (Evans 2012, p.31). The advantages of the business partner function details that HR practitioner becomes a more strategic facilitator, with enhanced business focus, enhanced engagement with line managers and the capability to elevate people management issues within business agenda. Such a structure permits HR partners to exploit their “unique” knowledge and skills to reinforce and drive change within people management practices (Ulrich, Younger, and Brockbank 2008, p.829). HR business partners can also pursue with line managers on longer-term individuals resourcing, and talent management planning issues. The Role of the Strategic Business Partner The creation of SBP roles does not simply entail renaming some jobs or training people in fresh skills. For a majority of people, HR involves significant shifts in mindsets employed to guide and shape the function, behaviour, and work. The essential mindset shifts include: from past-focused to future focused; from authoritative and consultative; from the service provider to internal customers to a partner with other leaders. The role of business partners is to establish relationships with customers or business units/line; contributing to business unit plans; developing organizational capabilities; representing central HR; front office; log needs and coordinating HR services; and implementing HR practices (Truss 2001, p.1121). The common elements of the business partner role entail organizational and people capability building communicating HR initiatives, guaranteeing that vision statements get transformed into certain behaviours, and diagnostic, consultative, and organization development work. In pursuit of the solution as it connects to leading an organization within this rapidly changing world, there is no straight answer. Nevertheless, it is increasingly evident that the structure, establishment, and maintenance of the human system are a critical component to the success of the organization as they underpin the financial, technical, and operational systems of the organization (Crail 2006, p.9). All organizations anticipate attracting talented and committed employees, who equally anticipate working in well led, managed, and structured organizations. The human systems within organizations have to respond to issues regarding change, strategic execution, growth, and high performance are imperative to the organization and demand specialized and skill tests (Ulrich and Beatty 2001, p.293). Although, senior leadership within organizations view people issues as vital the executives do not perceive the HR and HR professionals as leaders propelling the people agenda within the business world (Jamieson 2007, p.2). Human system problems afflict senior management on issues like: designing and constructing an organization that is capable of executing the strategic and performance; solving challenges that lie at the interface of people, performance, and technology; enhancing innovation or speed across the organization’s processes; leading and attaining consensus from strategic planning sessions; highlighting where future leaders will emerge from; and, facilitating optimal performance of teams within organizations (Holbeche 1999, p.89). Strategic business partners’ role demands sufficient knowledge and competencies derived from both strategic HR and organization development disciplines. The next wave of organization effectiveness require the integration of HR and organization development into carrying out of changes, which demands to shift of some mindsets and altering of some development avenues (Al Jerjawi 2011, p.64). The transition from the present HR organization mindset and to strategic business partner role may encounter issues dwelling on decision making that human capital issues are essentially significant and should be addressed in line with other strategic and business considerations; transition from HR as an authoritative role to a partnership role with the strategic business partners working in equivalent executive partnership with other leaders; becoming future-oriented and innovative to respond unparalleled global challenges and rapid technology, economic shifts, and market; and, corporate leader’s from a human capital perspective to undertake strategy; and, seeking new knowledge and skills (Ulrich, Allen, Brockbank, Younger, and Nyman 2009, p.8). Key issues in Implementing Business Partnering One of the prominent issues facing the implementation of business partnering detail HR’s role. This emanates from a lack of clarity regarding HR’s role, as well as the absence of a uniform business strategy within which HR can work. HR is marginalized from actual decision making, and the impact of the SBP may differ (Rothwell and Benscoter 2012, p.125). Recent research has indicated that the role of the business partner has a significant impact in instances, in which the organization is changing rather than when the organization is stable. 2) The second issue facing organizations adopting organization entail intrinsic conflicts within the model. The performance of one function may come into conflict with that of others yielding competing demands and potential role overload (Deloitte 2009, p.4). Similarly, the divergent expectations or irreconcilable performance criteria in undertaking a single role such as being a strategist while at the same responding to line manager’s tactical issues may affect the implementation of business partnering. Majority of human resource business partners fails to make the transition from their historical role of HR owing to lack of skills and lack of understanding of the new role. The manner in which the role is constructed can hinder the strategic elements based on the need to deliver short-term business results, a lack of incentive, and absence of time and training. In terms of involvement, there is a concise rationale for the proposed changes, which represents a joint decision between HR and business (Inyang 2010, p.23). The transition from generalist to business partner has frequently not been easy for HR professionals, who can perceive it “complexity to step away from normal operations” (Pritchard 2010, p.183). Although, the business partner role has “awarded the freedom from previous generalist work and facilitated a more strategic focus.” Pritchard (2010, p.181) has highlighted that, in some instances, business partners continue to remain engaged in generalist work. However, other practitioners perceive this as “a critical stepping stone” to a more strategic role. The capability to comprehend how the transactional side of the agenda works and the capability to continue the capability to continue to determine HR issues is essential to building trust with line mangers (Harris 1994, p.2). This is sometimes regarded by some practitioners as the basis for successful partnerships. According to Ulrich, Younger, and Brockbank, a fresh competence of “strategic architect” is demanded, which translates to “embedded HR professionals being capable to diagnose what should be done; broker resources to guarantee that things are carried out; and, monitor progress to guarantee things are accomplished (Ulrich, Younger, and Brockbank 2008, p.842). The required new set of skills coupled with a perceived natural reluctance to surrender, an area of work that had previously been viewed as adding value, makes the introduction of business partnering an uphill task. Debate has raged in the last 15 years since the introduction of Ulrich’s concept of business partnering based on the potential effectiveness of the model the business, and the degree to which the model has allowed HR practitioners to embrace a more strategic approach (CIPD 2006, p.11). Some critics argue that the business model has not yielded in strategic thinking and has produced no more than a shallow spin (Lawler and Boudreau 2012, p.5). It is essential to exercise caution when adopting the business partnering model since this entails a paradigm shift for the bulk of HR functions yielding in changes within HR’s values, operation, and skills as this do not merely entail repackaging of good HR practice (Rothwell and Budscooter 2012, p.5). The business partner’s most prominent failing can be regarded as the incapacity to convince senior managers that they possess essential business acumen, to add to the strategic debate. Despite the evident popularity of Ulrich’s model, many commentators remain doubtful to the exact success and not persuaded by the premise that it “represents the way forward for people management.” Some critics have pointed out that the model has frequently involved only a change of title for HR mangers, and has not yielded in any improvement within strategic thinking on HR issues in business (Ulrich, Brockbank, Johnson, Sandholtz and Younger 2008, p.4). However, Ulrich stipulated that poor implementation and an absence of understanding have obscured the significance of the model. Concerns have been raised given that most practitioners have hurried into implementing the Ulrich model devoid of first properly considering whether it satisfies the needs of the business. Conclusion The introduction of Ulrich model has overtime been conceived to comprise best practice. The incorporation of HR business partners emerges as a popular method of a HR service delivery. This has enabled the HR function to become intimately allied to business practice. Conclusions to be derived from the research indicate that there cannot be a ‘one-size-fits-all’ model, which necessitates that structure to follow strategy. Hence, whereas Ulrich’s model is valuable, businesses should adapt the model to their circumstances. The success of a business partner hinges on the development of several competencies such as knowing the business the complexities of what line actually does and the manner in which the business makes money, knowledge about strategy, the economy, and markets comprehending the theory and practice of HR, customizing or implementing HR solutions in creative ways. References List Al Jerjawi, K. (2011). HR mangers’ roles & contributions in merger processes, International Journal of Human Resource Studies 1(1), pp.64-79. Becker, B. E., Huselid, M. A., & Ulrich, D. (2001). The HR scorecard: linking people, strategy, and performance, Boston, Mass, Harvard Business School Press. pp.213-214. Caldwell, R. (2001). Champions, adapters, consultants and synergists: the new change agents in HRM, Human Resource Management Journal 11(3), pp.39–52. CIPD (2006). The Changing HR Function: The key questions, London, Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development. pp.11. Crail, M. (2006). HR roles and responsibilities 2006: benchmarking the HR function, IRS Employment Review 839 (1), pp.9–15. Deloitte (2009). Shaping Up: Evolving the HR function for the 21st century, New York/London, Deloitte MCS. pp.4-6 Evans, A. (2012). Creating a Tipping Point Strategic Human Resources in Higher Education: AEHE 38:1, Hoboken, John Wiley & Sons. pp.31-32. Harris, P. R. (1994). High performance leadership: HRD strategies for the new work culture, Amherst, Mass, HRD. pp.2-3. Holbeche, L. (1999). Aligning human resources and business strategy, Butterworth-Heinmann, Oxford. pp.89. Inyang, J. B. (2010). Strategic human resource management (SHRM): A paradigm shift for achieving sustained competitive advantage in organization, International Bulletin of Business Administration 7, pp.23-36.  Jamieson, D. W. (2007). Strategic Human Resource Thinking, in Preziosi, R. The 2007 Pfieffer Annual: Human Resource Management, San Francisco:  Pfieffer/Jossey-Bass. pp.2. Lawler, E. E., & Boudreau, J. W. (2012). Effective human resource management a global analysis, Stanford, Calif, Stanford Business Books, an imprint of Stanford University Press. pp.5-6. Price, A. (2007). Human resource management in a business context, London, Thomson. pp.55-60. Pritchard, K. (2010). Becoming an HR strategic partner: tales of transition, Human Resource Management Journal 20 (2), pp.175–88. Robinson, D & Robinson, J. (2005). Strategic Business Partner: A Critical Role for Human Resource , San Framcisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers. Inc. pp.2-4. Robinson, D. G., & Robinson, J. C. (2008). Performance consulting: a practical guide for HR and learning professionals, San Francisco, Berrett-Koehler Publishers. pp.203. Rothwell, W. & Budscooter, B. (2012). The Encyclopedia of Human Resource Management, Volume III: Critical and Emerging Issues in Human Resource Management, San Francisco: Pfieffer/Jossey-Bass. pp.5-8.  Rothwell, W. J., & Benscoter, G. M. (2012). Encyclopedia of Human Resource Management, Critical and Emerging Issues in Human Resources, Hoboken, John Wiley & Sons. pp.125-126. Truss, K. (2001). Complexities and controversies in linking HRM with organizational outcomes, Journal of Management Studies 38 (8), pp.1121–49.  Ulrich, D, Allen, J, Brockbank, W., Younger, J., Nyman, M. (2009). HR Transformation: Building Human Resources from the Outside In, Salt Lake City: The RBL Institute. pp.8.  Ulrich, D. (1997). Human Resource Champions: the next agenda for adding value and delivering results, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. pp.89-90. Ulrich, D., & Beatty, D. (2001). From Partners to Players: Extending the HR Playing Field, Human Resource Management, 40(4), pp.293-307 Ulrich, D., & Brockbank, W. (2005). The HR value proposition.  Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing. pp.278-279.  Ulrich, D., Brockbank, W. Johnson, D., Sandholtz, K., & Younger, J. (2008).  HR Competencies: Mastery at the intersection of people and business, Alexandria, VA: SHRM. pp.4 Ulrich, D., Younger, J. and Brockbank, W. (2008) ‘The twenty-first century organisation, Human Resource Management, Winter 47 (4), pp.829–50. Vogelsang, J. (2013). Handbook for strategic HR best practices in organizational development from the OD network. New York, American Management Association. pp.22-23. Wofford, T. (2002). Competitive Advantage: Strategy & Human Resources, Journal of Applied Management & Entreneurpreship, 7(1), pp.135-147. Yeung, A., & Berman, B. (1997). Adding value through human resources: reorienting human resource management to drive business performance, Human Resource Management 36 (3), pp.321-335. Read More