Management of Employees
Management of employment
With respects to Boxall’s (2007) work about the management of employment in a modest milieu, an employer has two main aspects to put to his or her consideration; in addition to that there are also two variables to be put to perspective to ensure total opulence of the business in context. The four jointly stir a business to greater heights. Though most of the prospering enterprises have had their schedule running in the settings of the four, they have failed to keep up with either one or the other condition from time to time. Most corporations and businesses have good, enchanting and reasonable thoughts that are also cost efficient(Boxall, 2007). The goals are mainly the driving factors of a business; however, they should also be considerate of the expense involved. Successively, most business entities have scored A’s on the management of fund and running cost efficient objectives. Social legitimacy is also in the mindset of businessmen and women across the globe. Most of their businesses are acceptable and morally upright in our contemporary lives, though not all of them have value for business ethics.
The other two factors have been the biggest huddles that businesses have had to battle with in the 21st century (Verkinderen et al 2002). Most businesses are not flexible in this trendy world because there is an observable change in business models. Therefore it has become almost impossible to cop up with the new cultures in the markets. There are very few entities that have gone against all the odds to sustain and incorporate the trends of the modern markets in their ventures (Nayyad et al, 2011). Their flexibility has given them a ready market at all times basically for the reason that they met the consumer’s as well as the employee’s demands (Okpara et al, 2008). The flexibility of an employer has a direct impact on the employees and the work output in general. An independence business is accountable for all its expenditures; the growth of business is virtually dependent on the employer. If an employer can make proficient decisions that are not influenced by an external force then his or her entity is likely to succeeded and be adopted as an accomplished business success concept (McPherson, 2008). However, most employers seem to forget these factors have different implications on the employee. The employees who are loyal in a shifting and intelligent workforce are always prone to having many challenges dealing with their work competently.
As suggested by Boxall most employers goals are uniquely cost effective. There is no employer who would want to extravagantly use his or her fortune. There are formal procedures that are designed to handle financial matters in a well-established business (Boxall, 2007). All the expenses are accounted for and limits are made on the maximum expenses that the business should have in a given business period. Likewise there are human resource management’s strategies to ensure that these businesses run appropriately and within a given framework. The entire concept of human resource management strategy is based on an approach that is goal oriented (Nayyad et al, 2011). It mostly considers as the long term goals and objectives that would determine the future of an enterprise. The strategy is mainly dependent on the allocation and the directives that are essential and vital for the fulfillment of the goals.
Though the strategy has three most essential attributes, the characteristics are not considerate of the fact that the employees also play a major role in a business environment (Lawler, 2003). Being strategically fit definitely will help the business gain congruency, functioning effectively and being focused to future prospect will eventually help the employer and the business grow. However, there are several risk factors that can emanate from the employees that are most likely to affect the operational capability of the business (Vanhala, 2011). The proprietors should also be well aware of the critical role played by their employees in ensuring that the objectives and goals of the organization are fully attained. Some organizations have made ambiguous projects that have caused massive loss and have equally ended up being a big challenge to the company’s projected plans. Apart from this level of ambiguity some organizations have also suffered from making misdirection in projects as goals, which have ended up being a hindrance rather than an opportunity.
Studies have shown that the employees who are loyal at their places of work will only hold to their loyalty as long as there basic and most urgent needs are constantly attended in a sufficient way. Nonetheless, more than 85% of employees are likely to fraud their employers because of unpredictable circumstances that occur within their lives and which could indirectly affect their actions, (Batt, 2000). Over 97% of organisations record more than one case of cheating from their employees annually. This is as a result of the high levels of intelligence and the flexibility within the workforce, which make difficult to envisage a persons’ thought and plans.
As much as organizations are trying to have high social legitimacy, it is seemly impossible to attain these objective with accordance to level of absolute performance (Vysa, 2009). Social legitimacy is almost entirely dependent on the environmental set up of an enterprise. There are numerous researches that show the relationship between the environment and the employees in boosting the growth of an institution. Therefore, most organizations are likely to grow rapidly and radially, if the relationship between the employees and the surrounding people and places is strong (Okpara et al, 2008). These can be enhanced by using some basic approachable techniques, where the surrounding community and the employees as well as the employer are encouraged to interact. In this case both the society and the employees will be assured of security and they will all be training to correlated effectively and stay motivated. However, most organizations would rather save their finances than have that extra expenditure on this type on trainings and interactive learning.
In these scenarios, organizations always anticipate that the community and the workers can mutually co-exist without them laying a foundation for their existence. By having an interaction or a social relationship with the environs and the employees, it is easier to formulate policies that will incorporate their views and thoughts in every aspect of organizational development (Lawler, 2003). However, the considerations should be made in line with the standard organizational laws to avoid rubbing shoulders with the authority. Apart from that, the local authorities and the government laws will also apply in the entire run of the businesses irrespective of the place or time (Vanhala, 2011). The laws provide the relevant capacity that would define the course a business is likely to take if set up in a certain mutually enriched environment. If the laws are not adhered to by the employee or the employer, then the social legitimacy is likely to have been temped with. However, not all legal stands that organizations refer to for the purposes of their operations technically legitimate because the moral levels of these laws depend on the changing law functioning. The struggle to balance between right and legal has also handicapped several organizations (McPherson, 2008). There are a number of organizations that have been caught up in the tussle between moral and legal attitudes, which has left them entangled in very difficult controversies over social and moral aspects. This to an employer is more regressive than progressive and will only destroy the organization and thus jeopardizing its development initiatives.
Self- sufficiency is very advisable factor in the milieu of business; it should be the main focus of any organization seeking to establish itself. If an organization is independent then it has more chances of trying out different investment and development initiatives (Nayyad et al, 2011). Autonomy has been cited as one of the greatest factors that has propelled several organizations to their current status. In most prosperous organizations, the autonomy has created a feel of employment security within the organization, self-driven individuals, general training and information sharing. This has encouraged the employees to be more effective at work. The effectiveness at work has challenged a number of employees to achieve better life quality which actually add value to their current job prospects (Batt, 2000). This would therefore mean that there are fewer people willing to effectively enhance organizational performance. However, more job autonomy has been a lead factor in workplaces, which has focused mainly on work delivery. This has therefore provided delivery satisfaction in organizations even though it has been almost impossible for vast majority of organizations to depend and deliver by autonomy (Lawler, 2003). Most of the employees in these organizations have their minds set on a different work paradigm, and are grid to a system which demands more hard work from them. The failure to meeting the demand of autonomy by employees will eventually result into a redundant growth of the organization.
It is evidently true that an employer and an organization need flexibility to do well in its level of operations (Batt, 2000). However, the flexibility of an employer and an organization are determined by three main scopes which are systematically organized to enhance performance. These factors are trends, market or economies, and environment within which the business is set up. Though the adaptability of an organizations to change might be shifted, it is still difficult to fully merge one system in to the other (Nayyad et al, 2011). The core factors in flexibility have also been the main limiting factor to the flourishing of many organizations in our modern societies. Flexibility should be handled gradually to assimilate most of the attributes of the intended time or trend. There are a number of internal and external factors that have made it almost impossible to shiftily have the merging of two or more cultures, trendies, and economical changes (Vysa, 2009).
Economic changes are in modern day a common phenomenal that can be felt throughout the world. Though business has been trying to come up with new entrepreneurial ideas, many countries are the globe was terribly affected by the financial crisis. However, there are resilient organizations and businesses entities that have stood strong in this era of hash economic crisis (Okpara et al, 2008). The resilience of these organizations and businesses that are struggling through this time of financial crisis has made them adapt to flexing their systems to cope with the monetary swings in the world. This would therefore forces these organizations into to try and gain stability, because the high inflation, volatility in exchange rates and unsustainable rates of debts. These in the long run result to losing of job, which affect the output of these firms, therefore causing work scheduling. Economic crisis do not only affect the organizations but also affect the employees as well.
Technological changes are also commonly referred to as change in trends. Its impact on business and organization has been on spotlight for various reasons (Li, et al 2006). The integration of technology into any organization or system is most likely going to improve the productivity of the entire system. In addition to that it will be cost-efficient and very effective to its purposed duty. However, since technology has a higher degree of interaction it will majorly affect the human resource management, and it might entirely change the working scheme of the employees. In the recent years, technology has been cited as the main problem in a number of multinationals enterprises because it was based on several techniques generating concurrent problem to the workforces according to Li, et al (2006). At the same time, technology has also been praise for being on the lead in facilitating significant growth in several enterprises across the globe.Therefore, as much as if it perceived as a good agent of success, there are fear that technology will lead the closure of several organizations due to its failing (Verkinderen et al 2002). The changing of trends in the market many times prompt employers to think of new venture to boost the organizations. However, this level of creativity might not translate down to increased work, since many a time the technological advancement take over and therefore the employees are most likely to lose their work in this context. It will therefore depend on the adaptability and the flexibility of an organization in coping up with the trend of technology according to the employer’s strategy (Li, et al 2006).
Other studies indicate that environmental surrounding impact is a main boost to the growth of an organization (McPherson, 2008). Though sometime it is considered a smaller factor, the magnitude of it is importance cannot be neglected. The physical surrounding of a business will obviously dictate the trends of the market. Nonetheless, there are consequences that related to this; the environment sets a platform for business and is therefore a key factor in determining the growth of an organization. The flexibility of an organization and an employer, are very essential in determining the transformation of a business or an organization’s system to meet the requirement of the environmental set up (Vanhala, 2011). Unfortunately, most of the employees are most likely to lose their jobs because if the new system that is set up not favorable to them.
The flexibility of an organization or a business entity is a main determinant in of the course that is taken by the business. In addition to that, all employers would like to have profit and growth oriented goal for their ventures. Nevertheless, the employers will do anything to have a cost efficient organization or business that will run smoothly with fewer problems(Boxall, 2007). Consequently, most the employees are not aware of the impact of flexibility and autonomy on their investments. It should be their basic foundation of starting up and ensuring that service delivery and management are fully achieved.
Okpara, J.O. and Wynn,P. 2008. “ Human Resource Management Practices in a Transition Economy”, Management Research News,Vol.31,No.1,pp.57-76.
Nayyab H H, Hamid M ,Naseer F, Iqbal M., 2011. “The Impactof HRM practices on the Organizational performance :The study of banking sector in Okara, Punjab Paki stan)”, Interdisciplinary Journal Of Contemporary Research In Business, Vol.
McPherson,M. 2008.“ HRM Practices and Systems within South Asian Small Business”, International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research,Vol.14,
Li Y., Zhao Y. and Liu Y., 2006.“The relationship between HRM, technology innovation and performance in China”, International Journal of Manpower, Vol. 27 No.
Lawler, E. E. &Mohrman, S. A. 2003. HR as a strategic partner: What does it take to make it happen? Human Resource Planning
Batt, R. 2000. ‘Strategic segmentation in front-line services: matching customers, employees and human resource systems’. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 1
Boxall, P. and Purcell, J. 2007. Strategy and Human Resource Management, Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave
Verkinderen, F. & Altman, Y. 2002. “Leisureplanet.com – Organization and HRM in the New Economy” Human Resource Planning
Vanhala M and Ahteela R, 2011. “The effect of HRM practices on impersonal organizational trust”, Management Research Review,Vol. 34
VyasSumita, 2009.” Employee Involvement –Key of Success in Change Management”, HRM Review , ICFAI University Press, Hyderabad, Vol.IX