Human Resource in Context - Essay Example

Section/# Regardless of the approach that one takes to the current business world, it is clear and apparent that globalization has made a profound impact with respect to the way in which goods and services are represented to the consumer. The majority of the research that has been conducted with respect to globalization 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 globalization 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. 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 globalization 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 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 globalization 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 globalization led to a new level of competition that required firms and business organizations 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 globalization, 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 organizational 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 organization will engage with a given subject/issue. 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. 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 relatively 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, 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). 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). 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. 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. Bibliography Acquaah, M 2004, HUMAN FACTOR THEORY, ORGANIZATIONAL 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, ORGANIZATIONAL 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, CM 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, NM 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 & Organization, 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