Comparison And Contrast Between Human Resource Management And Industrial Relations

The purpose of this reflective paper is to show my understanding along with what I have learned about HRM (human resources management) and the different way HRM impacts the success behind every business, along with the rules and regulations that go with it. Over the last five weeks I have learned quite a bit about HRM and will reflect on that throughout this paper. “Human resource management is the managing of human skills and talents to make sure they are used effectively and in alignment with an organizations goals.” (Youssef, 2012). I will be including the things I learned throughout the last five weeks in this

The current function of HR can be defined as supporting “the delivery of the organisation’s strategy and objectives through the effective management of people and performance” (Taylor & Woodhams, 2012; 22). This definition is furthered by a CIPD survey (2007; 2-3), which indicated that the key functions of HR are: recruiting and retaining staff, progressing performance management to maximise the value of employees and increasing employee engagement.

Human resources management was defined as ‘a strategic, integrated and coherent approach to the employment, development and well-being of the people working in organizations’ by Boxall and Purcell (2003). Noon, 1992 (as cited in Armstrong, 2014 a, p6) drew ‘doubts of whether HRM was a map, a model or a theory. But it is evident that the original concept could be seen as a philosophy’. The human

Human resource management refers to the process of dealing with people or controlling them. It plays an important role in effective utilization of human resources and bringing effective people in an organization (Attridge, 2009). With the following research at DaVita, one shall come to know about the standard model of HRM and how it is employed in the strategic planning of an organizational structure.

Gunnigle, P., Kelly, J. and Morley, M. (2002). Human resource management, employee relations and the labour market. Bradford, England: Emerald Group Pub.

Wright and McMahan (1994) define strategic HRM as “the pattern of planned Human Resource deployments and activities intended to enable the organisation to achieve its goals.” A HR function should impact the success of an organisation; a policy must remain current and suitable to both the internal and external environment. Ulrich and Lake (1990) affirm, ‘HRM systems can be the source of organisational capabilities that allow organisations to learn and capitalise on new opportunities.’

The HR Function is in a position to add value by proper formulation and implementations of the following activities and in turn support the organisation strategy.

There are so many fallacies for instance the term of ‘human relations’ and ‘human resources’ where the contemporary organisation unseen the differences between this two approaches. Both human relations and human resources manager might use the same kind of organisational behaviour but for very different reasons (Miller 2009). Human relations approach emphasize on productivity where the management advocates better on treatment of subordinates in belief that it

Trade unions have been a central part of the Australian workplace. The workplace however has changed over the past two decades and it is possible that the role of trade unions within the workplace has been replaced by the introduction of Human Resource Management (HRM) practices. As stated by Leigh, 2005 “from 1914 until 1980, at least two in five workers were members of a union” and unionism was therefore for the most part the dominant approach, in terms of employment relations. However current membership is at around 20 per cent and coinciding with this decline in trade union membership is the increase in the step away from collectivism to individualism and the use of strategic HRM practices in response to the shift from a

Traditional approaches to human resources metrics have proven to be inadequate. Businesses have been measuring and reporting on the same data for the last two decades or more, i.e., turnover rates, costs per hire, FTE, and total compensation, but still have “an inability to directly measure HR’s impact on the bottom line” (DiBernardino, 2011, p. 45). With advances in technology, the rudimentary evaluation of metrics can be expanded to more broad categories, and across functions that allow organizations to quantify the value-added component that HR has on each function within an organization. Conversely, with initial and continuously large investments in human capital for most organizations, a failure to measure and optimize financial performance may translate into huge losses, and certainly sunk costs. Therefore, it would make better sense for organizations to focus on human resources, not as a necessary expense, but as a needed investment in this current economy. By focusing on not only what is there, but what is missing in the measurement of metrics may allow businesses can begin to uncover the true intricacies on the value-added impact of the human resources function, and allow human resources to become a full and strategic partner in building blocks to the planning processes for businesses.

As the HR world changes, so too does the needs of understanding the complexity of our HR measurements and analytical systems. Consequently the more that I researched articles on the viewpoints of HR professionals strategic measurements, the more awareness was created on how much the traditional measurement models are not significantly related to HR’s strategic roles, though they do relate to an organization 's strategic activities. The future framework of measurable strategies will need to be logical, reliable, consistent and flexible. There are no perfect models however the research journey provided me with lessons, organizational highlights of significant accomplishments, and each article offered recommendations for improvements which

An organization cannot put together an outstanding team of professionals without good Human Resources department, commonly referred to as “HR”. HR managers focus on a wide range of responsibilities

There are a few theories supporting the act of HRM. Two of these theories; Resource-based View and Ability and Motivation and Opportunity theories give off an impression of being the most well-known theoretical frameworks used in the studies that connect HRM and organizational performance. The Resource-Based View (RBV) theory which mixes ideas from organizational economics (Penrose, 1959) and strategic management (Barney, 1991) has it that HRM conveys included worth through the strategic development of the organization’s rare, significant, difficult to emulate and difficult to substitute HR. The RBV sets up that competitive advantage no more lies in regular assets, technology or economies of scale, subsequent to these are anything but easy

Human Resource is a function which is essential in every organization, but also one which is most criticised. The debate whether HR is for the benefit of the employees or the organization has been one of the most contentious issues in management. The fact is that, the purpose of HR function is to enable the organization to achieve its strategic goals by providing it with the best possible talent. Therefore, before evaluating whether HR is on the side of employee or management, one must understand that HR is part of the organization and exists for the benefit of the organization. However, this does not necessarily mean that HR has to be against the interest of employees.

HR employees can become strategic contributors to company success. Transforming the HR function into a strategic contributor can take your workforce strategies to the next level and increasing the value of your human capital to accrue distinct competitive advantages.