This concept led to the evolution of strategic HRM (SHRM).
Various models of SHRM have been proposed by different researchers. Each of these models considers human resources at the focal point, and organizational strategies formulated in line with organizational goals and expectations from employees. However, the challenge to SHRM is its inability to be measurable. It is extremely difficult to measure effectiveness of strategies before achieving any outcome; at the same time, waiting for outcome could be disastrous to the organization. Kaplan and Norton’s Balanced Score Card system is an impressive way to assess the effectiveness of strategies. This helps in translating an organization’s vision, mission, value and strategy into a comprehensive set of performance measures based on four key perspectives, finance, learning and growth, internal processes and customers. It also enables companies to assess short-term strategies, modify strategies and also manage performance (Kaplan & Norton, 2007).
Nevertheless, SHRM is a complex and dynamic process requiring a systematic approach that includes consideration of external such as socioeconomic, technical, politicolegal factors and nature of competition; and internal factors such as culture, structure, leadership, technology, organizational goals (Lundy & Cowling, 1996, 77). Yet, the comprehensive six-step SHRM application tool seems highly useful for organizations to implement SHRM at the ground level and with a futuristic vision (Hartel et al, 2007). Considering the dynamic nature of SHRM and constantly changing environmental and organizational behaviors, scope of SHRM cannot be defined or limited. Philosophically, leaders and strategists should have an outlook of ‘change’ in using and implementing SHRM concept.
It is clear that HRM is a complex phenomenon and all factors related to HRM need to be