Hr Systems Comparison: System Thinking , Best Practice, Best Fit
Managing human capital | HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT | | |
|
Table of Contents 1. Abstract 3 2. Introduction 3 3. System and Ecological Thinking 4 3. Best Practice 5 4. Best Fit 6 5. Discussion 7 5.1. ‘Systems Thinking’ 7 5.2. ‘Best-Practice’ 8 5.3. ‘Best-Fit’ 9 6. Summary and Conclusion 10 7. Bibliography 11
1. Abstract
This assignment will assess three main schools of thought that apply to Human Resources Management (HRM). With regards to contemporary HRM concepts it is evident that a consideration of the ‘larger picture’ is necessary to be able to effectively push an organisation towards its ideals goals. A consideration of ‘system thinking’, ‘best practice’ and ‘ best fit’ systems of HRM lead to balanced conclusion that it is necessary for an HR Manager to have a sensitivity to the individual needs of the workforce as well as the ultimate mission of the company. Each system discussed here does this differently here does this differently with each focussing on alternate viewpoints of what is most important; be it the intricacies of the system, the commitment applied to the overreaching goals of the organisation.
This study finds that our of the three areas studied is viable and arguable that best practice system offers the most well rounded set of principles for general HRM. However, to assess the appropriate HR System for a more specific organisation either local or international, it is essential to consider a conglomerates system, which takes into consideration the specific aims of the company the needs of the staff to create an efficiency and enhanced performance that is still systematic and easily applicative.
Key words: System Thinking, Best Practice, Best Fit, Human Resource Management
2. Introduction
Human Resource Management was influenced from the changing look of the employment management relationship that occurred after the First and Second World War. It starts with the First
|
Table of Contents 1. Abstract 3 2. Introduction 3 3. System and Ecological Thinking 4 3. Best Practice 5 4. Best Fit 6 5. Discussion 7 5.1. ‘Systems Thinking’ 7 5.2. ‘Best-Practice’ 8 5.3. ‘Best-Fit’ 9 6. Summary and Conclusion 10 7. Bibliography 11
1. Abstract
This assignment will assess three main schools of thought that apply to Human Resources Management (HRM). With regards to contemporary HRM concepts it is evident that a consideration of the ‘larger picture’ is necessary to be able to effectively push an organisation towards its ideals goals. A consideration of ‘system thinking’, ‘best practice’ and ‘ best fit’ systems of HRM lead to balanced conclusion that it is necessary for an HR Manager to have a sensitivity to the individual needs of the workforce as well as the ultimate mission of the company. Each system discussed here does this differently here does this differently with each focussing on alternate viewpoints of what is most important; be it the intricacies of the system, the commitment applied to the overreaching goals of the organisation.
This study finds that our of the three areas studied is viable and arguable that best practice system offers the most well rounded set of principles for general HRM. However, to assess the appropriate HR System for a more specific organisation either local or international, it is essential to consider a conglomerates system, which takes into consideration the specific aims of the company the needs of the staff to create an efficiency and enhanced performance that is still systematic and easily applicative.
Key words: System Thinking, Best Practice, Best Fit, Human Resource Management
2. Introduction
Human Resource Management was influenced from the changing look of the employment management relationship that occurred after the First and Second World War. It starts with the First
Bibliography: 1. Midgley, G., Systemic Intervention: A Critical Systemic Perspective, in Systems Thinking, Government Policy and Decision Making, Bergvall-Karweborn, B. (Ed.), ISSS, Louisville, Kentucky(1995). 4. Checkland. P.B., “Are Organizations Machines?” Futures, 12:421(1980). 5. Miles, Raymond E. and Snow, Charles C. (1978). Organizational strategy, structure, and process. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co 6 7. Bennis, W. and B., Nanus, Leaders: The Strategies for Taking Charge, Harper & Row(1985). 8. . R.S. Schuler / Journal of International Management 6 (2000) 9 10. Armstrong, M., Managing People, A Practical Guide for Managers, Kogan Page, London(1998). 11. Beer, S., The Heart of the Enterprise, J. Wiley & Sons, Chichester(1979). 12. Beer, S., The Brain of the Firm, J. Wiley, Chichester(1981). 13. Bratton, J. and J., Gold, Human Resource Management-Theory and Practice, MacMillan Business, London(1999). 14. Belbin, E., Management Teams: Why They Succeed or Fail, Heineman, London(1981). 15. Burrell, G. and G., Morgan, Sociological Paradigms and Organizational Analysis, Arena, England(1994). 16 17. Combs, W.V., Manpower Planning: Operational Research and Personnel Research, American Elsevier Publishing Co., New York, (1965). 18. Flood, R.L., Solving Problem Solving, J. Wiley, Chichester(1995). 19. Flood, R.L. and M.C., Jackson, Creative Problem Solving, Total Systems Intervention, J. Wiley, Chichester(1991). 20. Flood, R.L. and N.R.A., Romm, Diversity Management, J. Wiley, Chichester(1996). 21. Foot, M. and C., Hook, Introducing Human Resource Management, Addison Wesley Longman Ltd., Essex(1999). 22. Habermas, J., Knowledge and Interest, in Sociological Theory and Philosophical analysis, D. Emmet and A. MacIntyre (Eds.) MacMillan, London, (1970). 23. Habermas, J., Theory and Practice, Heinneman, London(1974). 24. Handy, C., Understanding Organizations, Penquin Books(1993). 25. Jackson, M.C., Systems Methodology for the Management Sciences, Plenum, New York(1991). 26. Rice, A.K, Productivity and Social Organization, Tavistock, London(1958). 27. Ryan, T.A., Intentional Behavior, Ronald Press, New York(1970). 28. Tyson, S., and A., York, Personnel Management Made Simple, Heineman, London, (1982). 29. Weightman, J., Managing Human Resources, Institute of Personnel Management(1993).