The Difference between Personnel Management and Human Resource Management - Essay Example

? The Difference between Personnel Management and Human Resource Management Personnel management has been defined as an administrative discipline that is charged with the duties of hiring or developing employees for the purpose of increasing the value of an organization. This discipline comprises of the activities of performing job analysis, recruiting and planning of the personnel’s needs, selection of the appropriate candidates for a job and orienting or training them (Storye, 1992). It also involves the determination of the employee’s salaries, the provision of incentives or benefits, appraising the employee’s performances, resolving any disputes that may arise and communicating with all the employees of an organization (Aswathappa, 2009). On the other hand, human resource management has previously been defined as the act of managing an organizations workforce and is responsible for attracting, selecting, training, assessing and the rewarding the workers (Price, 2011). The field of human resource management is also responsible for overseeing an organization’s culture in addition to its leadership as it ensures they comply with the set labor and employment regulations (Aswathappa, 2009). Storye provided numerous dimensions offering various difference points between the concepts of personnel management and human resource management. This paper reviews and discusses some of these dimensions in regards to how they have impacted upon an organization’s structure and culture. Storye suggested that personnel management and human resource management differ in terms of the nature of existing relations and their impacts upon organizational structures and cultures. According to him, the nature of the relations can be viewed through two different perspectives which are the unitarist and the pluralist views (Storye, 1992). In personnel management, which is pluralist, more focus is laid on individual interests than is laid on the group’s interest. The relationships that exist between the managements and the employees are merely on contract basis with one party hiring while the other performs duties (Koster, 2007). Alternatively, human resources management follows the unitarist principles with more focus being laid on the groups’ interest (Aswathappa, 2009). The organization’s culture and structures under the human resources management enables the sharing of missions and visions between the workers and the management. These missions and visions are associated to the goals of the organization and help in fulfilling the organization’s and employees mutual interests (Storye, 1992). This implies that the organizations wants are effectively satisfied by the employees whereas the employees’ needs are efficiently satisfied by their organization (Brumfitt et al, 2001). However, under personnel management, the top management of an organization yields utmost power with most of it being centralized (Storye, 1992). The top level managers have absolute power in the process of making decisions with their personnel managers not being allowed to air their views or take part in these processes (Koster, 2007). This impacts the organizations culture and structures since the employees may not have appropriate channels through which they can air their grievances or views regarding the organizations operations (Aswathappa, 2009). The human resources department allows for the decentralization of the control of an organization with power being shared out between the lower and middle level managements. This facilitates the empowerment of employees and the human resource managers within the organization as they play vital roles in making decisions that are shared and collective (Price, 2011). The process is done for the benefit of both the organizations employees and the management (Brumfitt et al, 2001). In other words, the human resource managements focus more on the approaches known as TQM which implies that an organizations management and its employees have shared authority and power (Price, 2011). It facilitates the adoption of the approach known as bottom-up whereby the organizations employees provide feedback to their top managements who in turn offer the support required so that they can meet their mutually agreed objectives or goals (Aswathappa, 2009). Personnel management and human resource management may also differ in terms of the roles of leadership or management under the two and their impacts on an organizations structure and culture according to Storye. According to him, personnel management does emphasize on leadership styles that are very transactional which views an organizations leader as a person who is task oriented. The leader of an organization’s personnel does focus more on the procedures that ought to be followed by the employees of the organization. He or she may use punishments for employees who are non-performing or do not comply with the organization’s regulations or rules (Storye, 1992). The leader also puts the accomplishment of duties and the accuracy of figures generated from the organization’s accounting books before human factors like trust, tolerance, care, interpersonal relationship and personal bonding (Koster, 2007). This therefore implies that the employees in an organization may adopt of culture of being impersonal to one another and may not find satisfaction in their work (Storye, 1992). This is mainly because the personnel’s leader is only concerned in the results delivered while not creating conducive working environments (Aswathappa, 2009). On the other hand, human resource management forms leaders who may be considered as being transformational. The leadership that is created encourages the sharing of the organizations objectives by the managements and the employees (Brumfitt et al, 2001). The managers are more people-oriented and focus mainly on the importance of shared visions, organizational cultures and missions, trust and the ability of being flexible. This helps in ensuring that the workers of the organization feel appreciated as they are included in the processes of making decisions (Price, 2011). Personnel management and human resource management may also differ in terms of the contracts of employment and their impacts on an organizations structure and culture according to Storye. Under personnel management, the contracts of employment through which they are employed by an organization are clearly written and they must strictly observe the agreed terms (Storye, 1992). These contracts are very rigid and deny any chances for changes or modifications taking place in them. In these written contracts, there are no compromises that stipulate the regulations, obligations, rules or the job (Aswathappa, 2009). The employees in an organization only have to follow the terms to the contract and are not allowed to divert from the contract (Koster, 2007). According to previous reports, employees under the personnel management have been restricted from indulging in activities that are beyond their contracts scope. This is despite the fact that these activities may be profitable for the organizations (Aswathappa, 2009). The style used by personnel management therefore limits the employee’s creativity and ability of innovating new solutions for an organization’s problems. The employees are not also included in the decision making processes since they are only required to follow the regulations that have been set for them (Koster, 2007). In contrast, under human resource management the terms to an employment contract are less stiff. The employees in an organization are continuously encouraged to suggest the different methods through which the can keep contributing knowledge and other skills to an organization (Storye, 1992). According to recent reports, the human resource managements have adopted a new approach of managing employees whereby they have established flexible working hours and policies that allow people to work from the confinement of their homes (Brumfitt et al, 2001). The human resource managements that can be found around the globe offer their employees the freedom or opportunity of selecting whichever working systems that may suit them and bring benefits to the organization at the same time (Koster, 2007). Previous reports have described this situation as a “win-win” strategy where both the employees and the management of an organization benefit through the work policies they make (Price, 2011). The organizations employees are satisfied with the conditions under which they are working since they have the option of negotiating for their well-being (Storye, 1992). The organization under this form of management is well organized with every employee having his or her own roles and responsibilities clearly spelt out for him (Aswathappa, 2009). Storye additionally suggests that personnel management and human resources management may vary depending on their pay policies or job designs. The difference between these managements in regards to this aspect also affects an organization’s structure or culture. The pay policies used under personnel management are only founded on the knowledge or skills required for a particular job (Storye, 1992). Moreover, the value of an employee is only based on his or her ability of performing the tasks found in his employment contract. In addition, the pay policies do not additionally encourage payments for incentives that add value to an organization’s activities (Brumfitt, et al, 2001). The employees in such organizations tend to be limited in their abilities of being creative or innovative and may most likely become dissatisfied with their work. This may in turn make the organization lose out on the profitability that may come from their employee’s innovations (Koster, 2007). Subsequently, the division of the organization’s labor is founded on the needs of a job and the required skills for successfully undertaking it (Aswathappa, 2009). On the converse side, the human resource management does encourage an organization to focus beyond the functional duties of an employee (Storye, 1992). The pays under this system are premeditated for encouraging continuous improvement and performance of incentives that add value to an organization’s operations (Brumfitt et al, 2001). These may include activities like the sharing of profits among groups that may in turn help in improving an organization’s structure and culture (Koster, 2007). The job designs under human resource management are said to be founded on team work rather than functionality with approaches like job rotations between departments being encouraged (Price, 2011). These approaches usually encourage the employees within an organization to handle more tasks which help in adding value to their jobs. These tasks in turn help in ensuring that they enjoy the incentives or benefits that are provided by the human resource managements (Aswathappa, 2009). Conclusion The paper described the differences that exist between the personnel management and the human resource management within an organization and the impacts of these differences on their culture and structure. It discussed several issues that are related to the nature of relations, the role of their leadership or managements, contracts of employment and pay policies or job designs. References Aswathappa, K. (2009). Human Resource And Personnel Management, New York: Tata McGraw-Hill Education. Brumfitt, K., Barnes, S, Norris, L. & Jones, J. (2001). Human Resources, Washington: Nelson Thornes. Koster, M. (2007). Human Resource Management Versus Personnel Management, New York: GRIN Verlag. Price, A. (2011). Human Resource Management, London: Cengage Learning. Storye, J. (1992). Developments In The Management Of Human Resources: An Analytical Review, New York: John Wiley & Sons. Read More