Human Resource Management in Its Environment - Essay Example

Human Resource Management (HRM) has evolved from the traditional personnel management and has now become more strategic in nature. The policies and processes have been integrated to improve organizational performance and different HRM models are practiced across firms. There are several models of HRM available like the normative, descriptive-functional, descriptive-behavioral and critical-evaluative as suggested by Legge (Truss et al, 1997). Some others break it into three sections but the two most widely adopted models are the soft and hard approach to HRM which fall under the normative models. These are based on opposing views of human nature and managerial control strategies. Employers have been accepting a range of ‘soft’ and ‘hard’ people-centered practices associated with human resource management (Cunningham & Hyman, 1999). HRM can thus be interpreted as a ‘soft’, developmental humanist approach or a ‘hard’, situational contingent approach (Kane, Crawford & Grant, 1999). Storey distinguishes between hard and soft forms of HRM, typified by the Michigan and Harvard models respectively (HRM Guide, 1997). The Harvard model of HRM or hard HRM by Beer et al focuses on the resource side of human resources and the control lies in the hands of the management. It is quantitative and costs are calculated in the form of headcount. In this approach, contend Truss et al, the human resource practices and policies are closely related to the strategic objectives of the organization (external fit) but are also coherent among themselves (internal fit). The soft model proposed by the Michigan School is a strategic approach and endorses management’s views (Gill, 1999). The soft HRM thus deals with the ‘human’ aspect of HRM and is concerned with communication and motivation. It deals with the utilization of individual talents and McGregor’s Theory Y perspective on individuals, which means developmental humanism (Truss et al). This is based on the assumption that people should be led rather than managed. This implies that people should be so motivated that commitment springs from within. The behavior becomes self-regulated rather than be controlled or imposed. Hence people do not work under external pressures and there is an environment of mutual trust within the organization. Soft HRM is also associated with goals of flexibility and adaptability where communication plays a great role. The soft version assumes that employees will work best when they are committed to the organization. They would not merely comply with the organization’s wishes but they positively and affectively commit themselves to the aims and values of their employers (Truss et al). With proper training and development, motivation and trust, such a commitment can be generated among the employees, according to the soft approach to dealing with human resources. Hence control is achieved through different means in the soft and the hard approach. In the hard approach control is concerned with performance measurement system, performance management and tight control over individual activities whereas in the softer version, it is achieved through self-regulation and commitment. In the harder approach the ultimate goal is to attain competitive advantage for the organization whereas in the softer approach the aim is to have a strategic fit. The soft model relies on high level of trust and self-expression whereas the hard model relies on low level of trust and direction. The soft approach focuses on employee motivation, development and commitment (Kane, Crawford & Grant, 1999). The management creates a work environment that emphasizes employee development through training, participation and communication. This can result in innovative, flexible and committed employees. In the hard approach the employees are viewed as resources to be dispassionately used and hence they focus on minimizing costs rather than investing in the development of the human resources. Hard HRM believes that human resources are passive and can be strategically fit with the job requirement. It focuses on close integration of human resources policies, systems and activities with the business strategy. Human resources are factors of production rather than the only resource that can convert inanimate factors of production into wealth (Gill, 1999). They are not considered the source of creative energy but merely to be deployed as number and skills at the right place and time. In the soft approach employees are proactive rather than and are values as assets. They are also considered capable of development, worthy of trust and collaboration that can be achieved through participation. Nevertheless, both the models – the soft and the hard approach fall under the normative HRM and have certain common characteristics. HR policies should be integrated with strategic business planning and used to reinforce or change organizational culture (Gill, 1999). They are also based on the premise that human resources are valuable and should be used to gain competitive advantage. This is possible by using the right policies that promote commitment. To effectively manage change the soft model of HRM would work for the issues found in the article, “Programme for Change”. This is because it is clearly perceived that there is resistance to change. Resistance to change can lead to negative employee attitude or counter-productive behaviors (Waddell & Sohal, 1998). This can be over come by a soft approach to HRM as the soft model is based on self-commitment. So long as there is resistance in the minds of the employees, they will not be able to deliver the best. Hence they need to be motivated and encouraged to align their goals and values with that of the organization. There is always resistance to change and besides change in different circumstances bring about different results. There are several issues that need to be managed by BBC and these include effective communication, preparing the employees for smooth transition, and training in technology. Most importantly there is resistance to change – resistance to the new work location as well as the work place environment. A soft approach would work best as it is concerned with motivation and communication. Change management refers to the processes and techniques that help in planning, implementing and evaluating any changes in business operations to achieve the desired objective (Hoang, 2007). Change management relies heavily on employees making a smooth process of transition. According to Schramm (2007) the HR department should be involved in the change management initiatives much before the changes are implemented. Most initiatives involve human capital, which makes the role of HR crucial in helping the organizational leaders determine the effects that change initiatives could have on the labor force. Not only has change initiatives been taking place but it has also become important to manage individuals through change. Resistance to change takes place due to several reasons. Lack of proper communication, when the purpose of change has not been communicated can lead to misunderstandings (Hoang, 2007). Resistance to change can also occur due fear of failure, threat to status and lack of perceived benefits (Proctor & Doukakis, 2003). Poor communication is a key driver to negative feelings and it appears that at BBC the purpose of change was not effectively communicated as only 77% understood their role in the change process even though 97% claimed to have understood the change process. Again, due to lack of communication there could arise fear of the unknown, fear of their future in the company, uncertainties of career expansion could cause them to resist change. People have been used to a certain pattern of working and do not like to disturb the equilibrium, contends Hoang. This has also been found at BBC as there was resistance from the beginning to shift to a newer location even though it was well equipped with the latest technology and amenities. They considered the area a ‘wasteland’ as it had ‘absence of places to eat and poor transport access’. This was a comparative observation as the previous center was surrounded by shops, cafes and restaurants. Resistance was also declared against the working practices as the work environment was a shift from cellar place to an open-plan, team-based environment where no individual would own a desk. The new work environment had a strong focus on internal communications but the staff underwent fear of the unknown and because their equilibrium would be disturbed. This implies that change management initiatives were not in place and the managers had not communicated the purpose of change. The staff had not been well prepared for the change which should actually take place much before the actual change. This is endorsed by the fact that staff engagement levels dipped after the initial migration process. Communication, training programs and plan for resistance to change has to be in place before change is actually applied. It has to be an integrated plan where the management understands the change management model, how to use it to coach their employees and how to integrate the plan. Timing for change management is also important as according to Woodward (2007) research suggests that change management should start during the problem identification phase of the project. Training too needs to be just-in-time and not a one way communication. People need to know why they need to understand something. At BBC it is obvious that training was not in place before the actual change was initiated. This is evident as has been quoted, ‘the skill development exercise was a microcosm of what we need to do across the whole of the BBC’. Resistance has been perceived during restructuring and more so in larger firms employing more than 500 people. Redundancy leads to fear of the unknown and is the most evocative and fear inducing form of organizational change (Worrall, Campbell & Cooper, 1999). BBC too is undergoing the stage of redundancy and hence the resistance is pronounced among the employees. BBC is aware that not everyone will be willing to move or relocate. Some would be redeployed while others would leave the organization. Compulsory redundancy seems unavoidable at BBC and this has given rise to fear. While some see it as a great opportunity to move from London to Manchester, others are unsure that this is what they want. Resistance to change can lead the employees to demonstrate a demoralized attitude and indifference to work. This is another problem that occurs in change programs (Gollan, 2006). The staff feels demoralized when they are not taken into confidence and this gives rise to emotions of anger, distrust and shock. Performance of employees is directly related to their attitude. The different emotions that arise during change programs can lead to decreased motivation, decreased trust in management and decreased levels of organization commitment even in subsequent jobs (Worrall, Campbell & Cooper, 1999). Individuals become concerned about their own development than the development of the organization. Decreased satisfaction level could reduce organizational commitment, morale and motivation. Need for job security and certainty can affect the motivation and morale of the employees. Training sessions can help to sensitize the individuals and bring awareness (Beard & Rees, 2000). It also provides tools and solutions to enable the individual to move from a state of intent to one of implementation. In other words, the process of transition becomes smooth and resistance can be overcome. To make change management effective through staff development programs line support is essential, according to Morrison (1998). Staff needs recognition at all levels to remain motivated. While motivation is the key to empower the staff, it is also necessary to get the front line managers to take collective responsibility (Landale, 2004). Several researchers however feel that resistance need not lead to negative outcome and can play an important role in the organizational change effort (Waddell & Sohal, 1998). Resistance has many advantages and if managed carefully these can be utilized by the organization to assist change. It is not the resistance to change; it is the resistance to uncertainties and the potential outcome. In fact the resistance serves as a warning or alert to the company and they can prepare themselves against those factors. Hence resistance serves as a useful tool to manage change as it is better than apathy and provides alternative ideas for consideration (Mabin, Forgeson & Green, 2001). Hence managers at BBC need to be proactive in dealing with resistance. They have to understand the issues and the underlying causes of resistance. In the case of change or introduction of advanced technology there is fear of not being able to work in the new automated environment (Hoang). Employees also resist change when they fear that fewer employees would suffice when technology is introduced or improvised upon. At BBC they have identified a gap between the capabilities of the role the skills that people have. BBC did engage a move manager and the migration took place in phases over a four-month period. They also concentrated on internal communication through newsletters, surveys and in several other ways. Nevertheless, they had not infused professionalism into the change management because they admit that they ‘learnt a lot of lessons in terms of involving staff in the migration process and engaging them’. BBC should maintain transparency in all actions and decision to keep up the employee morale and cooperation, as suggested by Pollitt (2006). Open plan environments and removal of management trappings can help replace old prejudices with new identity and optimism. BBC has been trying to communicate to the staff that change is for good and hence it should be accepted with the right spirit but Waddell and Sohal (1998) contend that it is a fallacy to consider change to be inherently good. Change can only be evaluated from its consequences and this is possible after some time has elapsed. Hence BBC should strive to manage change but wait for the consequences to understand the outcome. BBC is under pressure from external and internal environments. They have to relocate and they have to downsize as well. Such pressures according to Waddel and Sohal encourage change and resistance helps to balance demands against the need for constancy and stability. Resistance also helps to gain a certain momentum or rhythm which is critical to the survival of the organization. Hence resistance is not a negative attitude but gives direction to the organization. Thus this paper concludes with the observation that soft approach to HRM is necessary to manage change effectively. BBC is experiencing the migration and facing resistance from the employees. Resistance can occur due to various reasons including lack of communication, fear of the unknown, threat of status and the employees at BBC e undergoing all of this. They are reluctant to relocate to high-technology premises because they are not sure how they would cope with it. This shows BBC has not prepared the people for change and training and development has not taken place. The employees need to be taken into confidence, explained the purpose of change, the process of change, their role in the change process, and the expected outcomes. Resistance, as pointed out by some researchers need not be negative but provides an organization direction to move ahead. BBC should take clue from this theory and find out the underlying causes of resistance and devise methods to help the employees over come the resistance. References Beard, C & Rees, S 2000, Green teams and the management of environmental change in a UK county council, Environmental Management and Health, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 27-38 Cane, B Crawford, J & Grant, D 1999, Barriers to effective HRM, International Journal of Manpower, vol. 20, no. 8, pp. 494-515 Cunnigham, I & Hayman, J 1999, Devolving human resource responsibilities to the line, Personnel Review, vol. 28, no. 1/2, pp. 9-27 Gill, C 1999, Use of Hard and Soft Models of HRM to illustrate the gap between Rhetoric and Reality in Workforce Management, retrieved online 10 December 2008, from http://mams.rmit.edu.au/d4lhtsmk45c.pdf Gollan, PJ 2006, High involvement management and human resource line sustainability, Handbook of Business Strategy, pp. 279-286 HRM Guide, 1997, Maps and models of HRM, retrieved online 10 December 2008, from http://www.hrmguide.co.uk/introduction_to_hrm/maps-and-models.htm Hoang, P 2007, "Change management and force field analysis: change takes place constantly in business. Paul Hoang considers the barriers to change and looks at how managers can bring about change effectively.(Business Strategy)." Business Review (UK) 13.4 (April 2007): 26(2). British Council Journals Database. Thomson Gale. British Council. Kane, B Crawford, J & Grant, D 1999, Barriers to effective HRM, International Journal of Manpower, vol. 20, no. 8, pp. 494-515 Landale, A 2004, Motivation muscle frees up the front line at BVSC, Human Resource Management, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 27-29 Mabin, VJ Forgeson, S & Green, L 2001, Harnessing resistance: using the theory of constraints to assist change management, Journal of European Industrial Training, vol. 25, no. 2/3/4, pp. 168-191 Morrison, M 1998, A lower academic level of first line management training for medically qualified healthcare staff can enhance workplace performance, Industrial and Commercial Training, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 20–23 Pollitt, D 2006, Raise a glass to HR at Wolverhampton and Dudley Breweries, Human Resource Management International Digest, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 9-12 Proctor, T & Doukakis, I 2003, Change Management: the role of internal communication and employee development, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 268-277. Schramm, J 2007, Managing Change, HR Magazine, March 2007 Truss, C et al., 1997, Soft and hard n=models of human resource management: A reappraisal, Journal of Management Studies, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 53-73. Waddell, D & Sohal, AS 1998, Resistance: a constructive tool for change management, Management Decision, vol. 36, no. 8, pp. 543–548 Woodward, NC 2007, To make changes, manage them, HR Magazine, p 63, Worrall, L Campbell, F Cooper, C 1999, Surviving redundancy: the perceptions of UK managers. Journal of Managerial Psychology, vol. 15, no. 5, pp. 460-476. Read More