But the main characteristic of HR is the individual and separate recognition of each worker and his varying desires, needs and ambitions, and various dimensions of his life.
The realisation that people are not just employees, or a dark distant force, but are human beings too and they have to be managed in a way that is consistent both with their individual needs and organizational requirements. Actually speaking nothing much has changed, when one thinks of the measuring scales applied are the traditional requirements like quality and efficiency. But the basic difference has already come into existence where HR policies treat the employees not just as employees, but also as people with feelings and various requirements too. Organisational effectiveness could be expected only as the result of various inputs of human resource management. Without this investment, it is difficult to expect any great results in the output. This means human resources and business strategies should closely fit into one another. So the best model would be the one that could find the closest fit between the two.
For Model one, I am choosing Hard HRM also called the Michigan model, (Fombrun et al), which is an US model of Human Resources Management. According to Michigan theorists the following are the most important factors:
1. Selection of the most suitable people who can answer the needs of the organisation in every way possible.
2. Performance should be single minded and the only goal is to meet the organisational requirements.
3. Appraisal should be constant, with instantaneous feedback to and fro, and continuous monitoring should prevail.
4. Development of the skills and experience with training, knowledge improvement, encouraging coercion to keep the individual motivated at all times should remain continuously intact.
5. Rewards to the employees as an inspiration and motivation for further hard work that also can create a model for other employees.
They feel that experienced professionals should bank on the skills and knowledge from diverse disciplines and this collected information should be broken down to achieve solutions to various individual and group related problems. It also hope that this approach would give a new set of tools to the organisations to face the real-life situations, innovate new ways of teamwork with the maximum results, and the rich source of knowledge drawn from various disciplines would create an active field of Human Resource Management.
There is no doubt that it is a very effective and strong model of HRM. But it is an autocratic model, where something is missing. It has no feelings or weaknesses. Anything that deals with humans should have a certain failings and weak points and only then, it would be effective. This model is more suitable for communist rules. "Hard HRM assumes that increasing productivity will continue to be management's principal reason for improving HRM; while this is a major factor in many private and public sector organisations, it clearly is not the only one" Fombrun et al from Pinnington and Edwards (2000, p.11).
John Storey described it as Hard HRM, because of its implication on using the employees as the main means of achieving organisational effectivity in a rather cold and calculated way. Competitive success of any