Human Resources - Managing and Developing People - Essay Example

The effectiveness of Human Resource Management (HRM) is the key to success of any organization. Recent studies reveal that management of human resources is now considered and activity to be carried out by all managers (Thornhill & Saunders, 1998). Today human resource is considered not merely as another resource but human capital, which has to be valued and nurtured. Since they are considered human capital and make a difference to the organization, they have to be managed strategically. This brings out the importance why line managers should be aware of the link between the management of the human resources and the strategic direction of the organization as outlined by the top managers. This paper will review the roles and responsibilities of line managers in management of human resources and to what extent they contribute to organizational effectiveness. Top managers according to Thornhill and Saunders generally concentrate on formulating corporate goals and objectives. They offer ‘transformational leadership’ and they share their vision for future success with other employees. The middle managers play a vital role in any organization because they are the ones who interact most frequently with the employees. They are thus expected to have the ability to inspire, encourage, motive, enable and facilitate change by allowing the employees to become committed to the organization. This role of middle managers and their ability to strategically manage the human resources has been challenged. Bond and McCracken (2006) agree that organizations are increasingly adopting the HRM approach where personnel practices have become devolved to the line. This implies that the line managers should become more involved in HRM at the operational level. The role of the personnel specialist has also undergone a change. He concentrates on formulating strategy and is not concerned with what happens at the operational level from the perspective of the line manager. A study on local pay in the NHS revealed that middle managers used their discretion on a number of issues thereby operationalizing HR strategy. Line managers definitely have more opportunity to translate the HRM policies into practices at the operational level. A study of four companies in the financial sector by Bond and McCracken showed that line managers do take decision when employees make requests for time off at a short notice. This decision depends on several factors which include how committed the employee is to work and to the organization, the nature of emergency, how this leave would affect the work during the period of absence, whether it is keeping in line with the HRP policies, the good impact or the benefit to the employee concerned and if refused whether it would adversely affect the morale of the employee. This is general practice may be a very practical way of handling such issues because the HR personnel may not be in a position to understand the employee and his problems as there is no regular interaction between them. Discretion is a key feature and maturity of the line managers is important. Besides, it is also important that such employees who are granted leave are willing to work extra hours in case of emergencies. This can be done through shift swapping or flexitime as is now generally used by the IT companies. Bond and McCraken however realized that not all managers are competent enough to make the right decisions and it may not be fair to all staff. Line managers do use mix and match strategy for formal and informal policies. In the case of the four companies in the financial sector, the line managers were not trained and hence lacked discretion and maturity. Renwick (2003) found that line managers were happy to play the HR role because it gave him an opportunity to understand the work done, extend appreciation, and grant rewards and recognition to the staff. Some were even keen to take a leading role in the HR initiatives. They also felt that it was important for line managers to talk and have close relations with the people under them. At the same time, some felt their responsibilities increased with this added role and besides, they did not feel they had the competency to handle the HR functions. Devolution of HR work to the line managers needs greater participation from both sides. Whittaker and Marchington (2003) agree that line managers have to work in conjunction with HR practitioners. While HR personnel took the lead in framing policies, they either have the sole responsibility or took it in conjunction with the line managers. Line managers have a significant role in resourcing and employee relations, rewards and recognitions. Arguments still exist that if the line managers spend time on people management, they may do so at the cost of corporate goals and objectives. Doubts have also been expressed whether the line managers possess the necessary skills and knowledge. When FoodCo tried to downsize the HR department, they faced problems. HR has to be valued as a function but it has to be integrated with the strategy of the company. The line managers need the HR support, training and advice. Line managers are constantly in contact with the employees and for most of the employees, their immediate superiors represent the management of the company (Brewster & Larsen 1992). If these managers have the responsibility and authority to control and reward the employees directly under them, it could enhance productivity and effectively work out better for the organization. The personnel specialists have practically negligible interactions with the employers and it is felt that line managers are appropriate to handle the issues relating to staff under them. They are suitable to motivate and being out the best from the staff. Along with this, there is an increasing need for the HR to understand how businesses operate. When this happens, devolvement of certain functions to line managers automatically takes place. Budhwar (2000) cites the reasons why devolvement has taken place and line managers have been entrusted with the primary responsibility of HRM. Certain issues are too complex for the top management to comprehend and it is easier for the local managers to respond fast to it. When middle managers are allowed to use discretion and take decision, it prepares them to be future managers. Besides, the cost to company is reduced with such a practice. This may sound convincing in theory but how efficient are the line managers to cope with the different issues that arise concerning the workforce remains debatable. Huselid, Becker & Beatty (2005) contend while the HR professionals are responsible for hiring the staff in the first place but performance problem can only be identified by the line managers. A failure on the part of line managers can result in underperforming employees. Line managers would need the support of a measurement and information system to quickly fix or exit problems in the workforce. The HR views the entire workforce equally but the line managers may prefer a more differentiated system but the firm’s culture may make it impossible to treat execution of the workforce strategy anything more than an administrative core. The costs of such a strategy may not be immediately apparent but benefits are definitely there as the success of workforce indicates firm performance. If all the jobs are treated equally, the firm may under-invest on top performers and over-invest in underperformers. As a result the high performers leave while the low performers stay which eventually leaves a mark on firm’s performance. This justifies the role of line managers play in differentiating and identifying the workforce. IBM for instance caters to on-demand business and to service the clients it needs Adaptive Workforce (ADWF). IBM has adopted this strategy to integrate strategy/policy, process, organization, and technology to ensure that the resource supply and demand information is available throughout the business to match critical skills to client needs, on demand. In firms like IBM, the strategic value of a job cannot be left to an outside method of job evaluation. The line managers and the senior executive team have to be fully involved in assessment. There is no market equivalent to determine the strategic value of a job and the workforce strategy requires investing in human capital that have the capability to contribute to the firm’s strategic success (Huselid, Becker & Beatty). The NHS Trusts too have empowered the supervisors who are entrusted with the responsibility of discipline, dismissal, recruitment, issuing contracts and absence, The purpose is two-fold- it allows the personnel to develop a future strategy and it empowers the supervisors to have control over the subordinates (Cunningham & Hyman, 1995). An assessment of 45 case studies revealed that performance appraisal of non-managerial staff is the most common employee relations functions that the line managers are entrusted with. Since they are implementing empowerment, Cunningham and Hyman suggest that managers have the potential to develop subordinates. The line managers’ influence on manpower planning is not very strong but in areas of discipline and dismissal they are effective. Local authorities demonstrated reluctance among line managers to take on new responsibilities. Line managers also have an important role in the learning and development (L&D) within an organization. L&D is a critical part of HR because high rates of attrition are often associated with lack of proper training and development of skills. The workplace now requires promotion of positive attitudes towards continuous and lifelong learning. Line managers thus become important here because the employees need their support and motivation to undertake the learning and development of skills. Line managers have also been found to be more effective than the personnel specialists in bridging the gap between the organizational performance needs and individual performance. Besides, as discussed above, line managers themselves undergo transformation while executing such responsibilities. At the same time, line managers, may tend to defer learning when urgent tasks are at hand, which means in the long run the organization suffers. Gibb (2003) argues that line managers may not be good at evaluating the learning required or be good instructors or coach. Line managers playing an important role in training and development does not imply they have to personally instruct. They are definitely better positioned to evaluate what is essential for the role of the staff. Staff development responsibility is better in the hands of a third party also does not hold good argument. In many organizations, especially in the software industry, fully autonomous work groups are recognized and entrusted with responsibility within an agreed budget to work and perform. Managerial tasks are taken up by team leaders or project managers determine recruitment, pay, work allocation, and discipline, leaving very little for the HR specialists to deal with (Larsen & Brewster, 2003). Long term issues however are still left to the personnel specialists. The approach of Japanese investors in Europe has been greatly appreciated where the purchasing manager or the line manager not only plays a role in handling HRM within his department but also in determining capabilities and skills or HRM in the company’s suppliers. Research of course evidences that the responsibilities is equally shared between the personnel specialists and the line managers. While the recruitment, expansion or reduction of workforce, including the training and development lies with the line managers, the personnel specialists have the other responsibilities. Hearty and Morley (1995) contend that the line managers are concerned with the operational aspects of training and development while the policy and planning activities remain with the personnel specialists. Gennard and Kelly (1997) interviewed 28 personnel directors and 8 MDs and found that there has been a shift in the relationship between the personnel department and the line managers but this has not brought about a reduction in the influence of the personnel management at either the strategic level or the operational level. According to them the personnel department’s role has been enhanced and the change in the relationship is decided by the top management. Despite line managers taking an active role in HR functions, the importance and need for the HR has not declined. Downsizing has led to devolution of HRP responsibilities and the middle managers have gained importance (MacNeil, 2003). The role of HRM in many organizations is more strategic in nature which is also responsible for devolution of responsibility for implementing HRP policies to line managers. At the same time, with latest software available in the market for HR functions, the downsizing has become necessary. SAP has a system that can incorporate payroll, performance management, benefits administration, the handling of regulatory-compliance issues, e-recruiting and employee self-service transactions (Shuit, 2006). Its strong point is that it integrates human resources system under the umbrella of workforce management. Due to this the HR function is not so much for collecting and processing employment data but more about how to manage teams. Since the routine work is automated, the personnel specialist now has the responsibility to identify the high potential people in the company, create a development plan for them and follow their progress. Software and system are now in place to assist the HR which now leaves the personnel specialist to concentrate on strategic influence. The role of line managers in implementing HRM policies and practices has been taken for granted in many organizations (MacNeil, 2003). No formal training is provided to the line managers to help them fulfill the HR functions. This is a negative factor which influences the line manager’s performance within their HRM role. The line managers expected to learn their HR roles through experience. Their performance is seldom monitored and nor do they ever reflect on their own performance. Due to downsizing, organizations now have flatter structures and a lot of HRM functions are outsourced or automated. Consequently the functions of line managers in the role of HRM also are reduced. The line manager then works more as a facilitator encouraging knowledge sharing useful for developing the teams’ collective learning capability. The line managers have the capability to influence the experience of workers, their attitude towards the teams and the willingness to share knowledge. This requires good communication and interpersonal skills. The line manager may also communicate a negative learning environment by projecting that the team members will be at fault should the expectations not be met. This results in lack of trust and support necessary for a positive learning climate. Such an environment of fear and threat may become a barrier to innovation and creativity. Line managers need to be developed as facilitators but they too require to be trained to do full justice to their role. Line managers have always been involved in HR activities. In smaller firms the owner-manager takes care of HR activities but as the company grows certain aspects like the payroll are entrusted to a specialist. When the company further grows, a separate HR department becomes necessary. Involving line managers in designing and implementing HR activities is the key to success at this point. A comprehensive approach is essential for people management where decisions have to be made fast and on the spot. This is possible only when the line managers are involved since they are responsible for creating value. Papalexandris and Panayotopoulou (2006) suggest that recruitment, selection, training, motivating and committing of the workforce, should be a part of the line managers responsibilities. This is an enhanced role for the line managers. As Thornhill and Saunders suggest that the way the personnel specialists and the line managers interact, has an impact on the organization. The discussions above evidence that both these group of managers do not work in harmony with each other. Hence the impact on an organization is bound to be negative. The reasons for change in responsibilities of the HRM have been caused due to advanced technology, involvement of HR in strategic decisions of the firm, automation of routine jobs. Another reason that has been recognized by the companies is that line managers are more in contact with the staff and also are responsible for the achievement of the organizational goals. To attain this, they are more suitable to handle the HR responsibilities pertaining to the staff directly under them. Research further proves that in UK the responsibilities of HR are divided between the personnel specialists and the line managers. The operational aspects can be handled by the line managers but the HR policies and practices are best left to the personnel specialists. Even to handle the operational aspects, the line managers need to be trained otherwise they may negatively influence the team under them. The HR department feels the line managers are not capable of handling any issues like learning and development. Cost is another factor which has led the organizations to devolve certain responsibilities to the line managers. Downsizing makes it necessary for line managers to take added responsibilities, which also prepares them to be future managers. In nutshell, the HR managers and the line managers, both have to equally share the responsibilities because technology is here to stay and downsizing is the order of the day due to increased competition and cost effective measures. All that is required is for the line managers to be trained before they take up such responsibilities. References: Bond, S & McCracken, M (2006), The importance of training in operationalising HR policy, Journal of European Industrial Training Vol. 29 No. 3, 2005 pp. 246-260 Brewster, C. Dr. & Larsen, H H (1992), Human Resource Management in Europe, Cranfield Institute of Management Library Budhwar, P S (2000), Evaluating levels of strategic integration and devolvement of human resource management in UK, Personnel Review, Vol. 29 No. 2. pp 141-161 Cunningham, I & Hyman, J (1995), Transforming the HRM vision into reality, Employee Relations, Vol. 17 No. 8, 1995, pp. 5-20 Gennard, J & Kelly, J (1997), The unimportance of labels: the diffusion of personnel/HRM function, Industrial Relations Journal, 28:1 Gibb, S (2003), Line manager involvement in learning and development, Employee Relations Vol. 25 No. 3, 2003 pp. 281-293 Huselid, M. A Becker, B. E. & Beatty, R. W. (2005), Differentiating Your Workforce Strategy, harvard Business School, Working Knowledge for Business Leaders, 16 Oct 2006 Larsen, H H & Brewster, C (2003), Line management responsibility for HRM: what is happening in Europe? Employee Relations Vol. 25 No. 3, 2003 pp. 228-244 MacNeil, C M (2003), Line managers: facilitators of knowledge sharing in teams, Employee Relations Vol. 25 No. 3, 2003 pp. 294-307 Papalexandris, N & Panayotopoulou, L (2006), Exploring the partnership between line managers and HRM in Greece, Journal of European Industrial Training Vol. 29 No. 4, 2005 pp. 281-291 Renwick, D (2003), Line manager involvement in HRM: an inside view, Employee Relations Vol. 25 No. 3, 2003 pp. 262-280 Shuit, D P (2006), The Good News About a Bad Fight, 16 Oct 2006 Thornhill, A & Saunders, M N K (1998), What if line managers don’t realize they’re responsible for HR? Personnel Review, Vol. 27 No. 6, 1998, pp. 460-476, Whittaker, S & Marchington, M (2003), Devolving HR responsibility to the line, Employee Relations Vol. 25 No. 3, 2003 pp. 245-261 Read More