Without a proper human resources management department in an organization, that company is almost guaranteed to fail. More important functions of human resources management include recruitment, training and development, appraisals, job reviews, career planning and development, employee benefits, employee safety, and employee motivation , just to name a few.
Human resources management is so important to organizations because there are many objectives of this department that can drastically improve or negatively affect the organization. One major objective of human resources management is to drive productivity by ensuring competent employees are hired and remain up to date with training initiatives. Without proper human resources management at your organization, your departments will have a hard time working together which will cause your business to suffer.
More important objectives of human resources management are ensuring employee satisfaction, staying up to date with societal and ethical models, and maintaining a healthy work culture, as well as a healthy work-life balance for employees. Human resources management is so important to an organization because this department has many responsibilities and keeps the organization operating smoothly. As our society continues to change, the role of human resource managers is changing as well.
From compensation and benefits managers to training and development specialists, there are many growing human resources specialties that organizations will continue to incorporate.
If your organization lacks proper human resource management , now is the time to introduce this department before your business fails permanently. She has her B. One of the more important relationships for any company is the one between a manager and an employee. By developing the employee and the team, the staff understands how its actions affect the productivity of the entire department, according to the Management Study Guide website.
When employees take a personal interest in the productivity of their department, this helps managers to focus more on departmental procedures and employee development while having to focus less on administrative responsibilities such as dispute resolution and employee turnover. George N. Root III began writing professionally in Share It. Kciuk; December Also, the Equal Employment Opportunity Act has vastly increased the need for headquarters to be in control, union or not.
Yet each division has different tasks and needs, different skills and attitudes in its work force. Division A may need a labor force that is especially cost effective, while Division B, where the strategy may call for rapid product turnover, requires employees to be adaptive. Given these potential conflicts, experimenting with new approaches becomes riskier in large organizations than in small. Decisions become more sensitive, have longer shadows, and, understandably, executives may become more cautious and may procrastinate or pass the buck when they can.
These problems of size and diversity plague many large corporations these days. Their effects are perplexity and conflict at headquarters, frustration and irritation at divisional and plant locations, and a mishmash of personnel policies and practices that have no clear focus. Policies that swing from the corporate to the divisional point of view, with the responsibility resting in neither location, are often ineffective.
Human resources management faces a further fundamental problem that few companies have resolved. Acquiring and developing the right talents for the business as it changes strategy, technology, and products requires more shrewd, wise, long-range planning than any other corporate endeavor. Companies can usually replace or rebuild technology, physical facilities, products, markets, or business systems in 3 to 5 years. Clearly, management cannot dismiss the work force and start over again.
But it often takes years to effect much genuine change, and one bad decision or unfortunate sequence of events can undo those years of slow progress. In contrast to the nature of the HRM task, which is a function that requires long-term thinking, consistency, and staying power, short-range pressures such as budgets and annual plans force short-term reactions.
Successful managers seldom stay put long enough to see their HRM investments pay off. The scarcity of general managers who are as capable, confident, and experienced in the management of large numbers of people as they are in production, marketing, finance, and control is a further problem in many companies.
Nonetheless, despite their inexperience, executives who reach the top must select and integrate the six different concepts and disciplines of human relations, personnel administration, and industrial engineering. They must also manage the conflicts among the interests of the corporation as a whole, the different divisions, and the separate plants and facilities.
Why do so many general managers usually lack these skills? Several factors contribute to the difficulty. The first is that personnel work has seldom been attractive to fast-moving, younger general managers, who see the field as out of the mainstream of the business. Also, they see personnel as a staff function that is strictly advisory, that lacks authority and power, and that deals with small-scale, troublesome problems.
A personnel job is seldom an attractive position for a manager who wants to run something independently. Because they involve many other managers, they are not only time-consuming but also often frustrating. For these reasons, few outstanding managers move into personnel, and those in it often have problems getting out. The detail, the time required to gain expertise, the low status in the organization, and the lack of clear-cut authority can swallow up and overwhelm all but the very best in the field.
Finally, a few commonly held assumptions, the validity of which is increasingly doubtful, are at the root of the HRM problem. If one believes that well-intentioned managers naturally do well at HRM, the following will also seem valid:. Responsible, generous, enlightened top management will develop an effective employee group because its considerate and humane practices will inevitably trickle down and permeate the organization.
Management may share its prerogative to manage if it wishes, but philosophically employees have no right to manage. These premises are no longer valid. Widespread dissatisfaction with jobs despite adequate pay has been documented.
More workers now see good jobs as rights. It makes available services and advice that line managers can accept or reject since they have the responsibility for line operations. Decisions affecting human resource quality should not be dealt with in a secondary, catch-up, tidy-up, reactive way. Doing so gives a lower priority to personnel activities than to production, sales, or finance; results in personnel management assignments being a sentence to oblivion; fosters second-rate, sloppy personnel activities; and removes accountability from personnel officers for setting up reactive, short-term HRM policies.
By establishing careful and detailed annual forecasts and budgets and monitoring results by month, quarter, and year to meet the plans adopted, managers can effectively control and operate companies. This premise drives out long-range thinking as well as the long lead times required to build effective human resources. When good managers who will be held accountable are armed with good solutions, substantial improvements will result.
Managers wishing superior human resources must get at fundamental rather than superficial symptoms; they need to accept disappointments and unexpected outcomes of solutions to complex problems, and they need the staying power to work persistently at improving the quality of human resources. These problems are massive and stubborn. Since changing habits, skills, values, beliefs, and attitudes in a work force takes years, the lack of long-range planning in human resources is frequently disastrous.
So the ultimate irony is that the personnel function—which deals with the most fundamental and central corporate competitive resource and that has the longest time horizon of any function—is left with no long-range strategy and allowed to react merely to transient pressures and events. To develop human resources, corporate management will have to make some fundamental changes in its conventional wisdom. Managers need to tackle the mistaken premises head on and cast them out in favor of a new set like the following: If managers continually fail to listen, communicate, explain, anticipate, and in every way nurture commitment and mutual understanding, employees will inevitably become alienated.
In the nature of people and organizations there is a relentless gravitational slide toward alienation. Any company can begin to improve the management of human resources simply by doing the basics better. The most practical way to start is by performing all the routine ongoing personnel activities with extraordinary care.
Research suggests that for the many reasons cited earlier, recruiting, selection, compensation, job design, training, and communications procedures are in many companies hastily and inadequately carried out. Worst of all is supervision—the oldest and most written about of management skills. The business schools neglect it, and economics, schedules, costs, and time pressures allow careless and inhumane practices to characterize it.
Poor supervision is absolutely unnecessary—yet millions of workers have to put up with it. It hurts American manufacturing and service industries beyond belief. The importance of good supervision is so obvious that its rarity is astounding. The enormous improvements in HRM at General Motors began when managers went back to the basics of good supervision and communication. For instance, although QWL programs were behind the turnaround at Tarrytown, the fundamental changes were achieved by supervisors simply treating people with care and respect.
Managers need to set a seven-year time horizon for their human resources planning and operation. It takes at least seven years for managers to install, live with, improve, and reap the benefits of major change in personnel activities; to weed out unproductive skills or attitudes; and to hire a new generation. And it takes that long for employees to live through a period of history in a company that forms a new foundation of trust.
Seen as a seven-year ongoing problem, the task of human resources management takes on a whole new cast demanding staying power as well as clear philosophy and strategy. Similarly, at Hewlett-Packard the founders enunciated a set of standards that placed people first.
0コメント