Effective Human Relations - Book Report/Review Example

? Effective Human Relations Effective Human Relations Introduction The article used for this research is “Review Article: How Can We Make Organizational Interventions Work? Employees And Line Managers As Actively Crafting Interventions” by Karina Nielsen (2013). In recent times, there has been a growing significance in the processes of organizational interventions when assessing the outcomes on workers’ health, as well as their well-being. However, process evaluation is still in its early stages. It mainly consists of checklists motivated by public health intervention works. In such frameworks, workers are considered as inactive recipients whose responses to pre-developed interventions ought to be evaluated. Recent organizational intervention design lies on a participatory techniques and up-to-date process evaluations show that workers and line managers control the execution, as well as the outcomes, of organizational interventions. Nielsen (2013) asks what is the duty of managerial interventions, along with its ideologies, in promoting organizational transformation on a large scale, as well as how do they can be related to each other. It is rooted in longitudinal fieldworks in a case organization, which has, for many years, tried to progress with its fundamentally new and wide-ranging business idea, yet with insufficient outcomes. In an attempt to enhance its viability and success, a company should make use of interventions as it executes numerous change agents. The aim of such interventions is to enhance performance, behaviors or productivity through a series of structured team and individual activities, which focus on what workers do, as well as how they do it. This paper will offer a critical analysis of this article and discuss some of the significant and weak points with the author offered, as well as offer some recommendations that could have made this article effective. Tracking the current foci of recent frameworks, Nielsen (2013) missed out on significant information on the power of both the line managers and the participatory process on intervention outcomes. After going through this article, I argue that recent evaluation frameworks presented in Nielsen’s research suffer from four restrictions: (i) they are not aligned with up to date practice and research; (ii) and; hence, they fail to apply theory to clarify why and how human agents persuade intervention execution and consequences; (iii) they do not give ideas as to how such agency can be calculated; and (iv) neither do they talk about how people may apply knowledge gotten from process evaluation proactively when planning future organizational interventions. While pursuing research, the best way to come up with reliable findings is through using up-to-date resources and current practice methods. However, this research incorporated just one current material while the rest were from the 90’s. Even though, these sources are considered as the founding stones for this topic, many updates have occurred since the 90’s concerning organizational interventions. Current sources would have gone a long way to make the findings of the study more valid because of today’s transformed organization. Certainly, the organizational forms that used to exist in the 90’s are not the same as the ones that exist today. Therefore, with an aim of coming up with clear findings, it would have been vital if this article incorporated up-to-date studies and practices regarding organizational interventions. Because a majority of the outdated sources never used to apply the theories the advocated for, Nielsen (2013) also failed to apply theories that he advocated for in order to clarify why and how human agents persuade intervention execution and consequences. Some fields, particularly the health care sector, are affected by such studies in that they do not offer them a liable way of applying a framework that would easily intervene on the issues that are affecting their employees. It is known that the health care field incorporates some of the worst stress cases that are greatly affecting the personnel here; therefore, a step-by-step method of how to execute a framework that eases this stress would go a long way to assist such an organization. The comparative efficiency of individual- vs. organization-level interventions in preventing office stress is yet to be known. This is because Nielsen (2013) did not give ideas as to how such agencies can be calculated. However, this article proposes naturally that pursuing individual- and organization-level interventions to modify or reduce the causes of stress and teaching staff to cope much better with it, must have optimistic effects. In fact, the author suggests executing all-inclusive programmes through which organization- and individual-level techniques are utilized in a single intervention. Target groups, therefore, should be thought about when assessing the true potential of stress interventions (Nielsen, 2013). Persons with much lower levels of stress show slight or no change, when compared to those with much higher levels. This also dilutes the results. This article shows that techniques to thwart workplace stress have enhanced over time, but the author does not talk about how people can apply knowledge gotten from process evaluation proactively when planning future organizational interventions. Therefore, this urges for more rigorous study analysis and design in order to determine which techniques are the most successful for which groups and what factors of interventions guarantee or improve the chances of success. Hence, a framework for categorizing the different types of interventions is suggested so that average measures can be integrated for all supporting determinants. The author only offered current recommendations on ways of enhancing organizational, but forgot to incorporate ideas that would also assist the organization in the future, which makes the article seem incomplete. I tend to agree with the steps the author offered concerning how to develop organizational interventions, which are discussed below. The author advocates for eliminating hierarchical decision-making, focusing on groups, building trust, reducing unnecessary competition, investing in employees, interim measurements of control, active employee participation and strategic interventions (Nielsen, 2013). Since teams compose organizations, not only individuals, change should mainly happen in groups so as to make a difference in the culture. I agree with Nielsen (2013) that groups in an organization should have a clear perceptive about their objectives, mission and purpose, as well as the goals and organization of the company's structure. Therefore, for change agents to be efficient, workers and their respective departments must have a proper understanding concerning the diverse departments in an organization, as well as their relationships. Leadership in any firm should have a balance and not behave as if it is "above the law". This will, on the other hand, provide support to workers. Conclusion Therefore, it is vital that any research incorporates up-to-date information, which an aim of coming up with findings that relate to today’s business environment. Also, it is necessary that any theoretical framework is explained to the core in order for it to be efficiently executed in any organization. In order to come up effective human relations in an organization, the leaders of the company should consider ways of building trust among the employees, as well as between the management and employees, in order to ease organizational intervention. Human Relations is one of the most vital assets of any organization. The efficient performance of any company relies on the quality of its human relations. The quality of an organization’s human relations relies on the degree of knowledge through education and training that the workers have undergone, as well as their motivational level. Firms want to make use of their manpower through effective human relations. Effective human relations are one of the most significant factors of an organization. The aim of effective human relations in any organization is to maximize productivity of the employees and enhance the return on investment. Effective human relations are a mixture of organizational efforts comprising of training, development, education, career planning, as well as development, which guarantees continual enhancement and growth of the individual, along with his/her relationship with other workers. References Nielsen, K. (2013). Review article: How can we make organizational interventions work? Employees and line managers as actively crafting interventions. Human Relations, 66(8), 1029-1050. Read More