NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
Tzvetomira Nova A 4 Human resource management is based on the belief that human resources are uniquely important to sustained business success. An organization gains competitive advantage by using its people effectively, drawing on their expertise and ingenuity to meet clearly defined objectives. Human resource management is aimed at recruiting capable, flexible and committed people, managing and rewarding their performance and developing key competencies. It is important to stress that human resource management has not come out of nowhere. HRM has absorbed ideas and techniques from a number of areas. In effect, it is a synthesis of themes and concepts drawn from over a century of management theory and social science research.
There is a long history of attempts to achieve an understanding of human behaviour in the workplace. Throughout the twentieth century, practitioners and academics have searched for theories and tools to explain and influence human behaviour at work. Managers in different countries encounter similar experiences: businesses expand or fail; they innovate or stagnate; finance has to be obtained and workers have to be recruited; new equipment is purchased, eliminating old procedures and introducing new methods; staff must be reorganized, retained or dismissed. Over and over again, managers must deal with events, which are clearly similar but also different enough to require fresh thinking. It employs the techniques for strategic management for the utilization of human resources. It focuses on senior managers concern with achieving objectives and containing costs.
HRM is a mechanism for control and the exercise of power by top management. It encourages employee attitudes and behaviour, which are consistent with business goals. We are often not aware that our subconscious as wells as our conscious mind influences our attitudes and the process by which we reach decisions. As a result we may inadvertently take a position on a subject which is not so much a reflection of our own thoughtful process, but more a reflection of the value systems on which we draw, which have, in large measure, been inherited from our parents and the people with whom we grew up. Hofstede have shown that a wide variety of factors ranging from the degree of personal freedom which we find appropriate in our lives, to the ways in which we view intervention by the state in business affairs, are strongly influenced by the national culture. &# 61656; National cultural differences do exist and these are associated with a certain number of shared values. &# 61656; These shared value systems influence peoples attitudes in their adult working lives. These assumptions are supported by the results of a number of studies of transcultural businesses, all of which underline the importance of the influences of culture in the workplace.
Furthermore, they point to our tendencies to attribute a value to our shared beliefs as a factor, which may lead to conflict between people in transcultural environment. Hofstede's evidence derives from his work as a psychologist for an American multinational company with operations in more than fifty countries. Hofstede has derived four dimensions in terms of which the national cultures may be compared. These dimensions are: 1.
Individualism vs. collectivism: in an individualist national culture people concentrate on looking after themselves and their close family, whereas in the collectivist culture people have broader and more diffuse commitments to an extended family or community. On the whole the Third World countries are collectivist and industrialized countries are individualist. The most individualist country is Australia, closely followed by the other Anglo-Saxon countries and the Netherlands. 2. Power distance is the second dimension or the degree of tolerance for differences in power in given national cultures. In the context of formal organizations high power distance or a high tolerance for differences in power means in practice acceptance of strong leaders and of centralization.
The Third World countries are marked by high tolerance for differences in power together with collectivism, while most of the Western country show up as both individualistic and low on power distance. 3. Uncertainty avoidance is the third dimension. This derives from the fact that the future is by definition unknowable, which necessarily engenders some uncertainty. Societies respond to uncertainty in different ways, some by cultivating a relaxed stance, while others strive to control the future with a miscellany of planning, procedures and contingency arrangements. When the uncertainty avoidance and power distance scores are crossed there is some loose patterning with more of the Third World countries having a high tolerance for power difference and a strong uncertainty avoidance and most of the Western countries having the reverse profile of low tolerance for power differences and week uncertainty avoidance. 4. Masculinity vs.
femininity is the fourth dimension. The words are used here in a deliberately stereotypical way. The differences are socio culturally ascribed or determined and differ quite a bit from society to society. So, the countries which Hofstede designates as masculine are the ones which maximize these sex-role differences, and are ones in which tough values predominate performance, achievement, making money, showing off, and so on. The ones designated feminine are those where the dominant values, for men and women are those traditionally associated with the female caring role putting relationships first, concern with the quality of life, protection of the environment, etc.
The most masculine country is Japan. Venezuela and Mexico are high on masculinity and so are the German speaking group of countries -Austria, Switzerland, Germany itself. At the other extreme Sweden is the most feminine country. Understanding of human resource management There are different understandings of human resource management in different national cultures.
Of course there is some cross-culture common understanding of the purpose and the nature of the management task. But there are differences of emphasis, priority and understanding nonetheless. Here is an illustration of this proposition with regard to three leading European countries, and for Japan and USA. It is perhaps appropriate to start with the USA, generally regarded as the home of professional management. The USA developed management education earlier than anyone else did, and on a larger scale than in any other country. What then is the American understanding of human resource management?
That it is about personal success and corporate profit. The emphasis on profit is total. Profit is so important that all other considerations are secondary, even some that in the longer term might ensure or enhance profitability. The ethic of personal success is so strong that, it is rewarded strongly in remunerative and other terms. Ambition is universally recognized as a good thing. Failure is more awful than in Europe, because one cannot pretend one was not really trying in the first place.
And success when achieved will legitimize whatever you did to achieve it. What was argued for America is not exclusive to that country, but these features are manifest there to a higher degree than elsewhere? Against this background, is the understanding of management different in France? It can be argued that it, that in France management is about the application of educated cleverness.
The overriding assumption in France is that managers need to be qualified educationally, to be capable in the areas of analysis and synthesis, to be good at logical argument. Wherever possible the French define management as an intellectual task, with capability driven by cleverness. Management here is about Technik. Where Technik is the engineering knowledge and craft skills relevant to the production of three-dimensional artifacts. More broadly management in Germany is about the application of specialist knowledge and experience. Management here is about character, social skills and leadership.
Management in the UK is more person-driven than system driven. Leaders enjoy high standing, not engineers or specialists or anyone seen as narrowly professional. People with the right human qualities social and political skills, judgement and a touch of charisma are presumed to be capable of filling roles in a variety of organizational settings. So perhaps the overriding characteristic of Japanese management is its unlikely combination of hierarchy and solidarity. The Japanese do like hierarchies.
There are strong norms of deference and social obligation. Yet these hierarchies do not produce estrangement as in other societies, but coexist with a high degree of solidarity, teariness, corporate belonging ness, together with the suppression of individuality and ascertain stoical inclination. One of the prominent features of Japanese management is the practice of permanent employment. Permanent employees are hired as generalists, not as specialists for specific positions. A new worker is not hired because of any special skill or experience; rather, the individuals intelligence, educational background, and personal attitudes and attributes are closely examined. On entering a Japanese corporation, the new employee will train from six to twelve months in each of the firms major offices or divisions.
Thus, in a few years a young employee will know every facet of company operations, knowledge, which allows companies to be more productive. Another unique aspect of Japanese management is the system of promotion and reward. An important criterion is seniority. Career progression is highly predictable, regulated and automatic. Japanese managerial style and decision making in large companies emphasizes the flow of information and initiative from the bottom up, making top management a facilitator rather than the source of authority, while middle management is both the impetus for and the shaper of policy. Consensus is stressed as a way of arriving at decisions, and close attention is paid to workers well being.
Not only are there often, different understandings of human resource management but there may also be a variety of differences of style, approach and practice. &# 61656; The orientation to profit and success. &# 61656; On the basis of drive and achievement. &# 61656; A traditional hostility to trade unions. &# 61656; Strong devotion to the managerial prerogative. &# 61656; A love of system planning, operating and control. &# 61656; A propensity to division alize business, especially in multinational companies. &# 61656; A conviction that all problems can be solved. &# 61656; Proactivity taking the initiative, aiming high. &# 61656; Professional relevantly educated and well trained. &# 61656; Weaknesses in the education system a more humble level in primary and secondary level. &# 61656; Direct, explicit, uninhibited, and often aggressive. Americans typically have a good idea of what they want and pursue their goals with force and consistency. &# 61656; When you come a...
Free research essays on topics related to: human resource management, understanding of human, uncertainty avoidance, third world countries, power distance
Research essay sample on Human Resource Management Third World Countries
