File Name: strategic role of human resource management .zip
Should we do away with HR? In recent years, a number of people who study and write about business—along with many who run businesses—have been debating that question. It is often ineffective, incompetent, and costly; in a phrase, it is value sapping. But the truth is, HR has never been more necessary.
Should we do away with HR? In recent years, a number of people who study and write about business—along with many who run businesses—have been debating that question. It is often ineffective, incompetent, and costly; in a phrase, it is value sapping.
But the truth is, HR has never been more necessary. The competitive forces that managers face today and will continue to confront in the future demand organizational excellence. The efforts to achieve such excellence—through a focus on learning, quality, teamwork, and reengineering—are driven by the way organizations get things done and how they treat their people.
Those are fundamental HR issues. To state it plainly: achieving organizational excellence must be the work of HR. The question for senior managers, then, is not Should we do away with HR?
The answer is: create an entirely new role and agenda for the field that focuses it not on traditional HR activities, such as staffing and compensation, but on outcomes.
Make no mistake: this new agenda for HR is a radical departure from the status quo. In most companies today, HR is sanctioned mainly to play policy police and regulatory watchdog. It handles the paperwork involved in hiring and firing, manages the bureaucratic aspects of benefits, and administers compensation decisions made by others. When it is more empowered by senior management, it might oversee recruiting, manage training and development programs, or design initiatives to increase workplace diversity.
But the fact remains: the activities of HR appear to be—and often are—disconnected from the real work of the organization. Can HR transform itself alone? Absolutely not. In fact, the primary responsibility for transforming the role of HR belongs to the CEO and to every line manager who must achieve business goals. The reason? Line managers have ultimate responsibility for both the processes and the outcomes of the company.
They are answerable to shareholders for creating economic value, to customers for creating product or service value, and to employees for creating workplace value. Indeed, to do so, they must become HR champions themselves.
They must acknowledge that competitive success is a function of organizational excellence. More important, they must hold HR accountable for delivering it. Of course, the line should not impose the new agenda on the HR staff.
Rather, operating managers and HR managers must form a partnership to quickly and completely reconceive and reconfigure the function—to overhaul it from one devoted to activities to one committed to outcomes. The process will be different in every organization, but the result will be the same: a business era in which the question Should we do away with HR?
Regardless of their industry, size, or location, companies today face five critical business challenges. Collectively, these challenges require organizations to build new capabilities. Who is currently responsible for developing those capabilities? Everyone—and no one. That imperative requires them to move people, ideas, products, and information around the world to meet local needs. They must add new and important ingredients to the mix when making strategy: volatile political situations, contentious global trade issues, fluctuating exchange rates, and unfamiliar cultures.
They must be more literate in the ways of international customers, commerce, and competition than ever before. In short, globalization requires that organizations increase their ability to learn and collaborate and to manage diversity, complexity, and ambiguity.
During the past decade, most Western companies have been clearing debris, using downsizing, reengineering, de-layering, and consolidation to increase efficiency and cut costs.
The gains of such yard work, however, have largely been realized, and executives will now have to pay attention to the other part of the profitability equation: revenue growth.
The drive for revenue growth, needless to say, puts unique demands on an organization. Companies seeking to acquire new customers and develop new products must be creative and innovative, and must encourage the free flow of information and shared learning among employees.
They must also become more market focused—more in touch with the fast changing and disparate needs of their customers. From videoconferencing to the Internet, technology has made our world smaller and faster. Ideas and massive amounts of information are in constant movement. The challenge for managers is to make sense and good use of what technology offers. Not all technology adds value. But technology can and will affect how and where work gets done. In the coming years, managers will need to figure out how to make technology a viable, productive part of the work setting.
They will need to stay ahead of the information curve and learn to leverage information for business results. Otherwise, they risk being swallowed by a tidal wave of data—not ideas.
Knowledge has become a direct competitive advantage for companies selling ideas and relationships think of professional service, software, and technology-driven companies and an indirect competitive advantage for all companies attempting to differentiate themselves by how they serve customers.
From now on, successful companies will be the ones that are the most adept at attracting, developing, and retaining individuals who can drive a global organization that is responsive to both its customers and the burgeoning opportunities of technology.
Thus the challenge for organizations is making sure they have the capability to find, assimilate, develop, compensate, and retain such talented individuals. Perhaps the greatest competitive challenge companies face is adjusting to—indeed, embracing—nonstop change. They must be able to learn rapidly and continuously, innovate ceaselessly, and take on new strategic imperatives faster and more comfortably. Constant change means organizations must create a healthy discomfort with the status quo, an ability to detect emerging trends quicker than the competition, an ability to make rapid decisions, and the agility to seek new ways of doing business.
To thrive, in other words, companies will need to be in a never-ending state of transformation, perpetually creating fundamental, enduring change.
The five challenges described above have one overarching implication for business: the only competitive weapon left is organization. Sooner or later, traditional forms of competitiveness—cost, technology, distribution, manufacturing, and product features—can be copied. They have become table stakes.
You must have them to be a player, but they do not guarantee you will be a winner. In the new economy, winning will spring from organizational capabilities such as speed, responsiveness, agility, learning capacity, and employee competence. Successful organizations will be those that are able to quickly turn strategy into action; to manage processes intelligently and efficiently; to maximize employee contribution and commitment; and to create the conditions for seamless change. The need to develop those capabilities brings us back to the mandate for HR set forth at the beginning of this article.
To be full-fledged strategic partners with senior management, however, HR executives should impel and guide serious discussion of how the company should be organized to carry out its strategy.
Creating the conditions for this discussion involves four steps. First, HR should be held responsible for defining an organizational architecture. Several well-established frameworks can be used in this process. What matters more is that an architecture be articulated explicitly. Without such clarity, managers can become myopic about how the company runs—and thus about what drives strategy implementation and what stands in its way.
They might think only of structure as the driving force behind actions and decisions, and neglect systems or skills. Or they might understand the company primarily in terms of its values and pay inadequate attention to the influence of systems on how work—that is, strategy execution—actually gets accomplished.
Senior management should ask HR to play the role of an architect called into an already-constructed building to draw up its plans. The architect makes measurements; calculates dimensions; notes windows, doors, and staircases; and examines the plumbing and heating infrastructures.
Next, HR must be accountable for conducting an organizational audit. Blueprints can illuminate the places in a house that require immediate improvement; organizational-architecture plans can be similarly useful.
They are critical in helping managers identify which components of the company must change in order to facilitate strategy execution. When the answer was no, HR was able to guide a discussion of how to obtain or develop what was missing.
The third role for HR as a strategic partner is to identify methods for renovating the parts of the organizational architecture that need it. In other words, HR managers should be assigned to take the lead in proposing, creating, and debating best practices in culture change programs, for example, or in appraisal and reward systems. Fourth and finally, HR must take stock of its own work and set clear priorities. At any given moment, the HR staff might have a dozen initiatives in its sights, such as pay-for-performance, global team-work, and action-learning development experiences.
But to be truly tied to business outcomes, HR needs to join forces with operating managers to systematically assess the impact and importance of each one of these initiatives. Which ones are really aligned with strategy implementation?
Which ones should receive attention immediately, and which can wait? Which ones, in short, are truly linked to business results? Because becoming a strategic partner means an entirely new role for HR, it may have to acquire new skills and capabilities.
Its staff may need more education in order to perform the kind of in-depth analysis an organizational audit involves, for example.
Ultimately, such new knowledge will allow HR to add value to the executive team with confidence. In time, the concept of HR as a strategic partner will make business sense. For decades, HR professionals have been tagged as administrators.
In their new role as administrative experts, however, they will need to shed their traditional image of rule-making policy police, while still making sure that all the required routine work in companies is done well. In order to move from their old role as administrators into their new role, HR staff will have to improve the efficiency of both their own function and the entire organization.
Within the HR function are dozens of processes that can be done better, faster, and cheaper. Finding and fixing those processes is part of the work of the new HR. Some companies have already embraced these tasks, and the results are impressive. In all three cases, the quality of HR work improved and costs were lowered, generally by removing steps or leveraging technology. Many HR processes can be done better, faster, and cheaper. HR executives can also prove their value as administrative experts by rethinking how work is done throughout the organization.
For example, they can design and implement a system that allows departments to share administrative services. At Amoco, for instance, HR helped create a shared-service organization that encompassed 14 business units.
You have just been hired to work in the human resource department of a small company. Previously, the owner of the company, Jennifer, had been doing everything related to human resource management HRM. You can tell she is a bit critical about paying a good salary for something she was able to juggle all on her own. On your first day, you meet the ten employees and spend several hours with the company owner, hoping to get a handle on which human resource processes are already set up. Shortly after the meeting begins, you see she has a completely different perspective of what HRM is, and you realize it will be your job to educate her on the value of a human resource manager.
Strengthening the employer-employee relationship is the strategic role of a human resources manager. Human resources managers formulate workforce strategy and determine the functional processes necessary to meet organizational goals. Their job requires expertise as an HR generalist, which means they must be familiar with every human resources discipline. During the s, personnel departments were responsible for handing out applications, providing employees with insurance enrollment forms and processing payroll. The role of the personnel department was mainly administrative. Over the next several decades, personnel administration became more involved with overall business goals. Companies began to recruit human resources leaders who were capable of strategic management.
A coordinative function. HR managers also coordinate personnel activities, a duty often referred to as functional control. Here the HR manager and department act.
Skip to search form Skip to main content You are currently offline. Some features of the site may not work correctly. This paper overall aims to encourage researchers and managers to consider the role of human resource management HRM in the field of information security management ISM more seriously. View Paper.
As stated earlier, the strategic management process involves four important stages: environmental scanning, strategy formulation, strategy implementation, and evaluation and control. Strategy Formulation Strategies are formulated at three levels: 1.
The purpose of this research is to explore the dynamics of using strategic human resource management SHRM practices in the public sector. More specifically, this paper tries to point out some main aspects of SHRM, which strongly influence the decision of employees to stay. This research is co-relational in nature with cause and effect approach. The design of the study is both descriptive in the theoretical part and quantitative in the applied one. Theoretically, this paper adopted the analytical approach to define the main concepts, aside from an empirical study to investigate correlations in practice. This paper concludes that the employment of best HRM practices is deemed a remarkable strategic tool in the retention of core public employees. The findings and recommendations of this research can practically guide management to devise effective policies to improve employee retention using appropriate SHRM activities, particularly in the Egyptian public organizations.
Members may download one copy of our sample forms and templates for your personal use within your organization. Neither members nor non-members may reproduce such samples in any other way e.