BUS 7479-HRM Flashcards
What is the difference between pluralist perspective and unitarist approaches in contemporary HRM studies?
Class 1 reading (Boselie et al. (2009) article)
Pluralist
- moral values and relational rationality
- more supported outside USA
- Mulit-level research in HRM automatically calls for a pluralist perspective taking into account potential different interests and perceptions of those involved (ee, line managers, HRM professionals, top managers, and employee representatives) and potentially conflicting or opposing outcomes for example labour productivity vs employee well-being
- key to the papers presented in this special issues
- acknowledge the sometimes conflicting interests of employees and employers
- Example of a paper written by van Woerkom and Croon, gives example that suggests team members are interested in creating a productive and pleasant atmosphere while managers are interested in output performance
- a more balanced HRM approach takes into account the economic side or organizing and the human side of organizing (not sure if this point is related to pluralist or just contrast to unitarist)
Unitarist
- added value and economic rationality
- dominant approach in 1990s
- built on the notion that certain HRM practices such as sophisticated recruitment and selection, extensive employee development, individual pay for performance, employee involvement in decision making, performance evaluation and teamwork are in the interest of both employer and employee
- what is good for the employee is good for the employer and the other way around
- what is of interest is effective people management
- lack of attention to the individual employee and potential negative impact of high-performance work systems on ee, causing dissatisfaction, stress, burnout, and fatigue.
- interest of org managers or shareholders, lacks a critical attitude towards effects on other stakeholders and mainly focused on the core employees of org.
- what is of interest is effective people management
List the 6 empirical papers/what they studied on managing the dualities in HRM “overview of special issue”?
Hint: 3 are based on quantitative data and the other 3 are qualitative data.
Class 1 reading (Boselie et al. (2009) article)
Quantitative data papers:
1. Bondarouk (2009) study the implementaiton of HRM innovation using data from HR prof and line mgrs in a construction company. Results support the previous notion on perception differences between HRM reps and lie mgrs. Also highlighted strategy implementation.
- Boon (2009) focuses on institutional alignment between HRM and the institutional environment of an org. Findings support a more balanced approach for shaping HRM in orgs (strategic balance theory). Also that orgs have a degree of leeway, human agency and strategic choice in response to instituional pressures
- Kroon (2009) studies the multi-level effects of high performance work practices on potential negative HRM outcomes in particular ee burnout. Results support “employee exploitation” oriented perspective on high performance work practices. In line with pluralist perspective that there are conflicting interest between employer and ee
Qualitative data papers:
1. Van der Meer and Ringdal (2009) study focus on the impact of flexibility practices on org performance. Results showed a balance between the application of numerical flexibility practices and functional flexibility practices. Contrast to theoretical proposition and support mixed picture.
- Van Gestel and Nyberg (2009) focus on translation of national policies into HRM practices taking into account the institutional perspectives and its impact on orgs. Findings suggest a distinction between national policy rhetorics and HRM realities percieved by HR managers.
- Ven Woerkom and Croon (2009) focuses on the relationship between team learning activities and team performance using a large dataset. Findings suggest differents between team member performance ratings and managerial performance ratings. Also that different team learning influences particular aspects of team learning. In line with more pluralist perspectives with the different of team members interestes vs managers.
What are three alternative theories for future research in HRM (besides psychological theories)?
Class 1 reading (Boselie et al. (2009) article)
New institutionalism
- alternative for analyzing the shaping of HRM in different org context.
Strategic balance theory
- focus on blending market and institutional mechanisms in an attempt to find balanced approaches in organizations
- applied on organization level
- future HRM research could benefit from strategic balance theory on how to create org agility in combination with input from the health psychological theories on how to create employee vitality within the org.
Health psychology theories
- represent balanced approaches on the individual employee level paying special attention to job demands and job resources.
- Blend org goals and the individual ee well-being in terms of stress, burnout and vitality.
What is the difference between multi-level and multi-actor research methodological challenges with HRM?
Class 1 reading (Boselie et al. (2009) article)
*this guy might need some more understanding
Multi-level research/analysis:
- including for example individual employees and org level data
- automatically calls for a pluralist perspective taking into account potential different interests and perceptions of those involved…
- example is psychological theories
Multi-actor reaseach/approaches:
- using input from different stakeholders such as ee, line managers, ee reps, and HRM professionals
What is the problem when it comes to the relationship between HR and executive?
What is the opportunity and solution to this problem?
Class 1 Reading Cappelli (2015)
Problem:
When talent is in short supply (like when the economy is booming and everyone and retaining ee can be difficult because they have so much to choose from), business leaders see HR as a valuable strategic partner.
BUT
When the labour market loosens up (when there is an economic downturn and everyone wants a job ) HR suddenly seems like a nuisance
This is all because managers and exc don’t like being told how to behave and see no immediate benefits to complying.
Opportunity
HR should set talent agenda now as they have the required perspective and expertise
Solution
HR rethink programs and make a business case for initiatives that matter and cut loose pet programas that lack impact.
What does “managing with ambiguous authority” mean?
Class 1 Reading Cappelli (2015)
It’s the position HR is in now at an organisation. HR try’s to get managers to follow procedures and practices with out having any direct power over them. And to managers it can feel like nagging and meddeling.
What are ways HR can avoid being considered annoying or meddeling with exc and managers?
Class 1 Reading Cappelli (2015)
- set the agenda
Don’t wait to be told what exc wants as exc are rarely experts on workplace issues so HR can show them what they should care about. HR should be saying “here’s how we should manage this task and here’s the evidence behind that view”
Here are some examples:
layoffs- can tell exc who to let go
recruiting- how to structure an interview so its fair
flexible work arrangements- advocate these are effective and are better than controlling folks to comet o work
performance mgnt- HR knows that supervisors need the training, time and incentive to a have serious convos with their staff about performance and growth.
- Focus on issues that matter in the here and now
example- ongoing conversations designed to improve skills and results
example- deloitte stopped using traditional promotion ladder for something more open and flexible framework for career advancement
- Acquire business knowledge
HR should understand workplace issues. Leverage data to make sense of their ee. Can help to find the best candidates and which practices increase productivity.
- Highlight financial benefits
Quantifying costs and benefits in this way turns talent decisions into business decisions.
Example- improved employee attitude led to better customer service which leads to higher profit
- Walk away from the time wasters
What are 7 dimensions that characterize most organizations producing profits through people?
Class 1 Reading Pfeffer (1998)
- Employment security
- innovation and productivity will not happen if workers are scared they will be out of job for being more productive or innovative
- example Lincoln Electric, SouthWest airlines
- builds trust between people and their employer
- encourages people to take a longer-term perspective on their jobs and org performance
- performance still matters and workers will be terminated if performance is not good but workers will not be fired due to an economic downturn - Selective hiring of new personnel
- needs to have a large applicant pool
- Singapore airlines, Enterprise car rental, standford business school, Hewlett-Packard, PeopleSoft, Subaru-Isuzu
- need to have a clear understanding of critical skills and attributes needed and be as specific as possible about attributes they are seeking
- only screen out applicants who have attributes difficult to fix through training; don’t recruit for job relevant skills that can be aquired
- hire on fit of the org, cultural fit & attitude
- use several rounds of screening to build commitment and to signal that hiring is taken seriously
- involve senior people when appropriate
- close the loop by looking back on interviews if an applicant who was hired does not doe well
- PeopleSoft asked “do you have a personal mission statement?” - Self-managed teams and decentralization of decision making as the basic principles of organizational design
- advantage because workers control themselves vs manager doing it so they don’t disappoint their peers, helps pool ideas to create a better idea, remove of hierarchical barriers (saves money)
- Whole Foods Market, AES, Vancom Zuid-Limburg
- Ritz-Carlton Hotel demonstrated decentalized decision making by giving each employee $2000 to do whatever they can to make the customer happy - Comparatively high compensation contingent on organizational performance
- Pathmark grocery store (paid managers), home depot (pays hire than retail wage), PepsiCo (stock option)
- can be compensation in various ways such as profit sharing, stock, share ownership, paying for skill acquisition, gainsharing
- stock ownership by itself does not affect performance but it is part of a broader culture that incorporates other practices as well
- also involves providing training, info sharing so workers have the skills and info and power to do anything with their motivation
- stock does not represent true ownership - Extensive training
- source of competitive advantage
- Men’s Wearhouse - Reduced status distinctions and barriers, including dress, language, office arrangements, and wage differences across levels
- Extensive sharing of financial and performance information throughout the organization / sharing information
- no secrets helps with trust
What is HRM?
*hint does Kramar (2014: 1072) or Boxall and Purcell (2008) do a better job defining it?
Class 1
the activities associated with the management of the people who do the work in the organisation Kramar (2014: 1072) *this one is preferred because HR goes beyond just ee and includes contractors etc.
activities associated with managing employees Boxall and Purcell (2008)
What’s the difference between soft and hard HRM?
*Where do you sit? Where are my ethics in people management?
Class 1
Soft
- competitive advantage is developing and investing in human capital
- Nurturing employees
- + ee and employer relationship
- collaborative HRM (gooderham et al., 1999)
- Example, the harvard model of HRM (this is the graph with everything you could possibly consider related to HR including stackholder interests, hrm, hr outcomes, etc)
Hard
- Hard (Guest, 1987)
- Calculative (Gooderham et al., 1999)
- Instrumental use of labour to meet business needs
- Unitarian working (people pit against each other)
- Often associated with exploitative practices
- biggest value is making money
- ee is disposable
There are 4 basic organization design choices. Depending on your structure HR will have a different type of influence on its people.
List the 4 structures and list the pros and cons.
Class 1
- Centralize
- You have one department for all HR functions
- example Shell, Novartis
Pros:
- consistency
- economies of scale
- Control
- Focus on long-term objectives
Cons:
- Lack of local knowledge
- Inflexible
- Communication challenges
- Misunderstandings
*so not ideal for companies that are international
- Decentralize
- this structure is the strongest champions of employees voice/champion of culture. HR is in every division
- Example PwC, Zurich
Pros:
- Customized
- Recognise local priorities
- Flexible
- Collaborative
Cons:
- Less economies of scale
- Higher transaction costs
- Duplication
- Matrix
- Mix of the pros of both decentralized and centralized. You’ve got corporate HR but you also have HR Business Partners in each division.
- Can advocate for employee voice but also has pull at HQ
- Examples Johnson and Johnson, Henkel
I’m not sure if this is where the stool comes in with the HR business partner, centres of expertise and shared services? - Outsource
- Great choice for start ups especially to outsource payroll but also includes on-line benefits, talent mgnt consulting, recruitment
- Example bp, Shake shack
Ulrich’s model of HRM
What are the 4 different HR functions according to Ulrich?
And what are the 3 components of Ulrich’s model? *I think I need some work to understand this part
Class 1
- Strategic partner
- process and future/strategic focused
- example HR would be the ones to go out to line managers and tell them about the strategy and how HR can create org goals to achieve the strategy within their team *I think this description works - Change agent
- Future/strategic focused and people
- so very people focused and looking into the future, talk to people about ways to better equip them *I think this description works - Employee champion
- day to day/operations focused but also people oriented
- this can sometimes feed up into the change agent - Administrative expert
- process and day to day/operations focused
Components
1. Centers of excellence
2. Shared services
3. HR business partners
At a high level what are HR business partners responsible for?
What are the 3 domains of organisational insight a HR business partner needs to develop?
Class 1
- Role varies widely between organisations
- Organisational/People capability building
- Talent management planning
- Business insights to drive change
- Advising on organisational change, practices and policies
- Intelligence gathering
- they are “insight driven” (CIPD, 2011)
Domains:
1. Organisational savy
2. Business savvy: knowing the busines ideology
3. Contextual savvy: do you know the social economic
What is the devolution of HR responsibilities?
What are the 4 criticisms of HR by line managers?
Class 1
Line managers are responsible for HRM stuff like performance appraisal, identifying training needs, provide coaching, deal with grievances
- employee champions (Guest & Kind, 2004)
Criticisms from line managers:
1. out of touch
2. constrain autonomy
3. Unresponsive and slow
4. Promote inappropriate policies
HRM = advisory
line manager = ownership
partnership between the two (ulrich, 1998)
Line managers feel:
1. Frustration – inadequate resources (McConville, 2006)
2. Relinquish initiatives (Harris et al., 2002) / uptake of new initiatives
3. Confusion (Boury & Sinclair, 2012) what applies to them and what applies to HR
4. Lack of KSAs (Renwick, 2003) tough when you’re a new manager promoted from an engineering role and never have managed before
HR has gone from transactional (reactive, payroll, compensation, benefits, ensures compliance) to strategic (more value and future oriented, organisational goals) and we are now in a place sitting somewhere in the middle of transactional and strategic.
What is strategic human resource management?
Give 3 examples of SHRM
Class 1
Linking people management and development practices to long-term business goals and outcomes
4 Definitions on profs slide that are all future oriented, it’s a bundle/high performing system:
the undertaking of all those activities affecting the behaviour of individuals in their efforts to formulate and implement the strategic needs of business (schuler, 1992)
The pattern of planned human resource developments and activites intended to enable the organisation to achieve its goals (wright & McMahon, 1992)
Boxall and Purcell (2011) SHRM = how HRM influences organizational performance
Strategy ≠ strategic planning
Examples:
- to deliver fair and equitable reward
- to improve employee performance
- to streamline organisational structure
