Growth and Development of Strategic Human Resources - Essay Example

Section/# Regardless of the approach that one takes to the current business world, it is clear and apparent that globalisation has made a profound impact with respect to the way in which goods and services are represented to the consumer. Yet, it should not be assumed that globalisation alone is the main/causal factor for the shift that has been noted with respect to the change towards HRM to SHRM. For instance, factors such as a shift in stakeholders, a shift in competition, shifts in technology, changes in society, and shifts concerning legal factors have all encouraged the change that has thus far been reflected. The majority of the research that has been conducted with respect to globalisation and its impact has been with regard to strategic competition and the means by which firms engage with one another in the marketplace (Kato & Owan, 2011). However, it is unfair to assume that this is the only role and application that globalisation has with respect to theory. Instead, it should be understood that changes with respect to the way in which businesses integrate with one another and with respect to how they manage the necessary inputs that are required for producing a given good or service have also shifted dramatically. As a function of seeking to apply this to a relevant understanding of human resources, the following analysis will engage in a discussion that is focused on the growth and evolution that human resource management has taken over the past several decades. Ultimately, the following analysis will be split into two main parts. The first part will provide a running commentary in brief history with respect to the growth and development of strategic human resources as compared to traditional human resource management. Likewise, the second section of the analysis will be concentric upon analyzing the following three models: the Bach model, the Ulrich model, and the Guest model. By analyzing and discussing each of these three models of human resource integration, the analysis will seek to provide the reader with a running commentary regarding the proscriptions that these analysts denote as well as potential criticisms that are inherent within their approach. As indicated previously, the shift from HRM to SHRM is not something that theorists came up with on a whim; instead, it was a careful and considered change that came to reflect the relevant issues that businesses were facing. As globalisation and increased global competition impacted upon firms and business entities, the need to be reflexive to these and respond saw a situation in which a human resource focus on the individual was not suited towards accomplishing increased competition and advantage. In almost an identical manner, changes in technology also prompted a more universal approach to HRM; one that would allow for the use of statistics, metrics, and key data points to provide inference to management with respect to what goals are being accomplished and in what way. Finally, societal an legal factors also have had an impact with respect to the redefinition of HRM to SHRM. For instance, a focus on the group and the means by which the utility of individuals from different backgrounds can be maximized has helped to urge HRM towards a more universal and less individual approach. Likewise, legal norms and constraints have caused the practitioner of HRM to be keenly aware of the fact that seeking to impart a particular approach within a certain subset of employees might well be cause for unfair treatment or legal action. As such, a shift towards a less personal and strategically minded form of HR has been practiced. Before delving in to an interpretation of these three theorists that were listed within the introduction, it is necessary to engage with a primary understanding for why a gradual shift between human resource management towards strategic human resource management has been evidenced over the past several decades. As was at alluded to within the introduction, the underlying rationale behind this has to do with the fact that human resources, as a general practice throughout the globe, has slowly shifted from seeking to promote the best interests of the individual employee towards seeking to promote the best interests of the firm and strategic goals that it hopes to accomplish (Ananthram & Nankervis, A 2013). This is not to say that businesses several years ago were not interested in profitability or success. Instead, the nature of business has not changed. Instead, practitioners and theoreticians have come to understand that profitability and success within the business world can be engaged by utilizing an alternative approach to seeking to maximize the individual interests of each employee within the firm. Naturally, seeking to explicate this entire process without briefly mentioning the role that globalisation has played would lead one to incorrectly understand the way in which strategic human resources has come to be defined over the past several decades. Ultimately, as firms seek to compete in a global marketplace and leverage the few and scant resources that they have to a more actionable and efficient degree, pressure has come to be placed with respect to human resources departments and the overall level of productivity and efficiency that they can evoke from their respective compliments. As a direct result of this, strategies and theories have been put forward which slowly move human resource practice towards different interpretations. Irrespective of this, HRM is the approach towards human resources that places an emphasis on the individual component of the firm; whereas SHRM focuses the approach towards maximizing the strategic goals of the orgnisation/form/entity in question. However, it must not be understood by the reader that the shift from human resource management to strategic human resource management was expected overnight. Moreover, it should not be assumed that the shift from human resource management to strategic human resource management was the result of globalisation alone. Instead, the following brief section will be concentric upon defining some of the main causal factors and stakeholders that were involved with respect to the shift from traditional human resource management to strategic human resource management; as it has been exhibited over the past several decades. Firstly, the changing nature of globalisation led to a new level of competition that required firms and business organisations to be an order of magnitude more competitive than they had been at any previous time (Kuchinke, 1999). As a function of this, pressure was placed upon the internal stakeholders by external factors. These internal stakeholders included but were not limited to Board of Directors, CEOs, middle managers, and virtually anyone within the human resource. Furthermore, technological and societal shifts such as demographic dynamics and the era of the computer further encourage individuals away from traditional human resource management towards strategic human resource management as a means of effecting the goals that a specific firm or business entity sought to accomplish. Likewise, as a renewed interest on competitive engagements and the ability to remain cost-effective was promoted due to globalisation, the managerial and business environment within firms shifted considerably (Walker & Materese, 2011). Ultimately, what can be noted from the above discussion is that a litany of unique factors all contributed to a gradual shift away from traditional human resource management and towards strategic human resource management. As a function of this, the following section of this brief analysis will step away from a historical interpretation of how this shift came about and will focus more specifically on three different models that have been put forward with respect to human resource theory (Vasile, 2010). Before delving directly in to the Bach’s model of human resource management, it is necessary to first approach his understanding of the way in which human resource management is defined within the current era. In short, Stephen Bach integrates with human resources based upon the understanding that over the past several decades much of the disagreement and confusion surrounding the correct definition and appropriate application of human resource management has dissipated. The underlying reason for this, according to Bach, has to do with the fact that more broad and all-encompassing definitions have been put forward; effecting a situation in which less disagreement is exhibited due to the fact that more universal and inclusionary definitions and theories are being applied and put forward. However, Bach indicates that definition of human resource management is in fact a little too broad; resulting in a situation in which definition becomes difficult. As such, Bach puts forward a model that is predicated on more firm and resolute view of what defines human resource management and what does not. Within his model, Bach asserts that employer and employee interests should coincide; leading to organisational effectiveness. Furthermore, Bach defines effective HRM as seeking out the interests of stakeholders that might otherwise be marginalized. Further is a specific interest on the individual within the firm and the means by which motivation and aspiration can be accomplished is represented throughout Bach’s model. Likewise, as a means of this focus, Bach definitively downplays the role of external or collective issues (Adjibolosoo, 2004). Naturally, the strength of this particular approach has to do with the fact that it oftentimes incorporates individuals and groups of individuals that would otherwise be ignored within a specific firm or business entity. However, by means of comparison and contrast, the most notable weakness has to do with the fact that the approach places such a profound level of emphasis upon the individual that it lacks a level of focus with regard to the collective actions that groups such as unions or others can effect. Even a cursory level of understanding with respect to group activity indicates that the power of the group is on aggregate much more as compared to the power of a single individual (Darwish & Singh, 2013). Although it is noteworthy and laudable that Bach chooses to place such a high level of focus upon the actions and importance of the individual, he does so at the expense of understanding communal action and the overall importance that groups have with respect to defining the way in which organisation will engage with a given subject/issue. Regardless of the strengths and weaknesses that Bach’s approach takes, it is the most individualized of the HR management techniques/theories that will be discussed within the analysis. Ultimately, Bach does not integrate with the SHRM approach and instead seeks to focus attention on the importance of individuals within the firm; oftentimes those that have otherwise been ignored or sidelined. Likewise, the second theoretical model that will be engaged within this brief analysis is that David Guest. According to Guests model, human resource management is defined by six dimensions of analysis. As such, these are as follows: human resource management strategy, human resource management practices, human resource management outcomes, behavior outcomes, performance outcomes, and financial outcomes. This particular model is inherently different due to the fact that is based on the assumption that human resource management is ultimately different from traditional forms of personnel management. Furthermore, it is overly formulaic and somewhat simplistic due to the fact that it is based on idealism and the understanding and belief that fundamental elements of human resource management have a direct relationship with respect to business consequences. However, to his credit, Guest indicates that the concept of human resource management is an “messy topic” (Acquaah, 2004). As such, it is understood that even employing a simplistic model that defines human resource management based upon six convention spheres runs the risk of overly simplifying the engagement level that a particular firm or business entity/stakeholder should take with respect to maximizing efficiency and productivity within the workforce. Guest’s theory stands in stark contrast to that of Bach; in that it promotes SHRM over HRM. The underlying reason for this has to do with the fact that Guest focuses on the spheres of influence and metrics of success that defines SHRM; rather than the need to engage individuals and promote their own best interests/wellbeing within the firm. The Ulrich model is unique among the ones that have thus far been discussed. The underlying reason for this has to do with the fact that the approach represented by the Ulrich model does not assume that all human resource management roles and responsibilities will be conducted by the same firm or enterprise. One relevant consideration that must be noted with respect to the globalized an increasingly interconnected world has to do with the fact that a great litany of different business compliments are now outsource two different firms as a function of completing. Accordingly, different roles that had traditionally been incorporated under a human resource management sphere within a firm are now oftentimes outsource two different competing contractors. As can relevently be noted, this creates a situation in which an infinite level of complexity is introduced into the realm of human resource management and HR activities (Beitl, 2014). As a function of this, Ulrich notes that a greater level of emphasis should be placed upon the actual deliverables that a business or firm requires to succeed. By means of contrast in comparison, Ulrich denotes that a focus on what he terms as “doables” is ultimately disastrous; as it leads the firm or business entity down a primrose path of potential engagements that have no notable end. Further, instead of measuring processes, Ulrich indicates that a far more effective level of integration is to focus on the results (Cowell, 2007). By utilizing and understanding what Ulrich denotes as the 4 main HR roles, how these can be accomplished in a more effective manner; leading to a situation in which renewed profitability and cooperation can return to companies that have previously struggled in effecting quality HRM or SHRM (Wang, 2013). According to Ulrich, these roles are as follows: HR business partner, change agent, administration expert, and employee advocate. As some of the other models and indicated, fostering and promoting motivation/cooperation is an integral part of ensuring that a joint benefit is created. However, due to the fact that this particular theory does not place a very high premium upon the degree and extent to which motivation takes place within the primary secondary phases of implementation, the reader is left to consider whether or not the real world could adequately sustain this model in terms of seeking to affect positive changes (Curry & Sura, 2007). In seeking to apply the Ulrich model to a real life situation, the analysis will note that a key shortcoming that it experiences has to do with the fact that the four different roles of the HR department are difficult to effect in a very small operation or organisation/business. For instance, as many small organizations will find it difficult to hire enough individuals to affect their core objectives and still remain profitable, the degree and extent to which the Ulrich model is applicable and useful for such an enterprise is direct scant resources as a means of ensuring that all the core functions of the HR department are fulfilled will be all but impossible. However, in the event that a small organization is able to engage with the Ulrich model of Human Resources, they will find it necessary to expend a very high percentage of their start up money as a means of hiring adequate or highly gifted HR personnel that are able to reflect the skills that Ulrich denotes as essential towards developing a resilient and powerful organisation. Interestingly, the Ulrich model can neither be defined as a HRM theory or a SHRM theory; instead, it is a unique combination of the two. Within such a manner, it is the understanding of this analyst that Ulrich’s model represents one of the most robust theoretical engagements for HRM and SHRM of the ones that have thus far been put forward. From the information that has thus far been engaged, it is clear and apparent that litanies of different approaches exist with respect to effecting human resource management and a proper and efficient manner. HRM management has grown and evolved a great deal and currently represents a type of synthesis between maximizing the best interests of the employee and promoting the strategic human resource goals that have come to be reflected so strongly with respect to the SHRM approach that has been denoted within this analysis. As can adequately be noted, each and every one of these approaches exhibit a key number of strength and corresponding weaknesses. Rather than indicating that any one of the approaches is superior to the other, the stakeholder should instead come to the appreciation of fact that each should be utilized with respect to its strengths and avoided with respect to its overall weakness. With this creates a situation in which the human resources practitioner find the incumbent to utilize a litany of different approaches/models as a means of effecting the goals that they seek to accomplish within the work sphere. List of References Acquaah, M. (2004) HUMAN FACTOR THEORY, ORGANISATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIORS AND HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PRACTICES: AN INTEGRATION OF THEORETICAL CONSTRUCTS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR MEASURING THE HUMAN FACTOR, Review Of Human Factor Studies, 10, 1, pp. 118-151, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 2 July 2014. Adjibolosoo, S. (2004) RESPONDING TO THE HUMAN FACTOR THEORY, ORGANISATIONAL CITIZENSHIP BEHAVIORS AND HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT PRACTICES, Review Of Human Factor Studies, 10, 1, pp. 152-154, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 2 July 2014. Ananthram, S., & Nankervis, A. (2013) Strategic agility and the role of HR as a strategic business partner: an Indian perspective, Asia Pacific Journal Of Human Resources, 51, 4, pp. 454-470, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 2 July 2014. Beitl, C., (2014) Adding Environment to the Collective Action Problem: Individuals, Civil Society, and the Mangrove-Fishery Commons in Ecuador, World Development, 56, pp. 93-107, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 2 July 2014. Cowell, N. (2007) Human Resource Development and Enterprise Competitiveness in Jamaica, Journal Of Eastern Caribbean Studies, 32, 4, pp. 31-56, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 2 July 2014. Curry Jr., R., & Sura, K. (2007) HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT (HRD) THEORY AND THAILANDS SUFFICIENCY ECONOMY CONCEPT AND ITS "OTOP" PROGRAM, Journal Of Third World Studies, 24, 2, pp. 85-94, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 2 July 2014. Darwish, T., & Singh, S. (2013) Does strategic human resource involvement and devolvement enhance organisational performance? Evidence from Jordan, International Journal Of Manpower, 34, 6, pp. 674-692, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 2 July 2014. Kato, T., & Owan, H. (2011) Market characteristics, intra-firm coordination, and the choice of human resource management systems: Theory and evidence, Journal Of Economic Behavior & Organisation, 80, 3, pp. 375-396, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 2 July 2014. Kuchinke, K (1999) Adult Development towards what end? A Philosophical Analysis of the concept as reflected in the research, theory, and practice of Human Resource Development, Adult Education Quarterly, 49, 4, p. 148, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 2 July 2014. Walker, J. & Matarese, M. (2011) Using a Theory of Change to Drive Human Resource Development for Wraparound, Journal Of Child & Family Studies, 20, 6, pp. 791-803, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 2 July 2014. Vasile, C. (2010) Mental Workload: Cognitive Aspects and Personality, Petroleum - Gas University Of Ploiesti Bulletin, Educational Sciences Series, 62, 2, pp. 132-137, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 2 July 2014. Wang, D. (2013) A Development Dilemma for Secondary Vocational Education, Chinese Education & Society, 46, 4, pp. 60-67, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 2 July 2014. Read More