Words: 1342
HARM is essentially the part of an organization that is in charge and accountable for the management of its people in all aspects (Inkers, Compton, Bird, & Coffey, 01 1) -?? treating the employees as valuable stakeholders as opposed to a resource used to produce the right work at the end of the day. This Will include the overall employment experience which includes procedures, systems and processes, policy-making, planning and implementation, as well as career and training in order to develop the organization (Hell, 2014).
HARM has become prevalent when it comes to an organizations competitive advantage. According to Inca – loan, in recent years the awareness that a company cannot develop or survive without a competitive advantage over its competitors has increased. In this essay the different Strategic Human Resource Management (SHRUG) models will be discussed in order to display which models will be a competitive advantage for an organization.
The first topic that will be discussed will be The Strategic Human Resource Management (SHRUG) Model, secondly, the Resource Based View (RUB), and lastly the Soft HARM model. The Strategic Human Resource Management (SHRUG) Model When it comes to HARM, there are many conflicting views as to which the better model would be to use when running an organization. However, in organizations it is more likely that certain models are going to be more suited or different departments and groups of people (Hell, 2014).
It is said by Collins and Clark, (2003) that in order for an organization to maintain a prolonged source of competitive advantage that offers value to the organization, the HER managers should support the resources that ensure that. This is why one organization cannot run their company by one model alone (Boxful & Mackey, 2007) In order for a company to be successful, sustainable and make a profit, the Human Resource Management strategy has to align itself with the Company Vision, strategy and objectives. The SHRUG model as a whole embodies this statement.
A company like Group Five uses the SHRUG model because it aligns the HER strategies – vertically, horizontally and diagonally – with the company’s strategic goal, vision and mission (Group Five, 2014). The SHRUG model tries to get the most from its employees as this will improve the overall productivity and performance and according to Humid, (2013) encourages the flexibility and the innovation of the organization (Brown, Meet, Cretan, & Kulak, 2009). The SHRUG model essentially rewards itself by the strategic side of its planning and execution rather than by the organizational side.
Although the Harvard Model sets one f its goals as meeting the employee needs and in exchange receives the commitment and loyalty to the organization, the SHRUG model ensures that the long term goals of the organization are met (Brown, Meet, Cretan, & Kulak, 2009). Brown, et al, (2009) also argues that not focusing enough on the needs of the employees means that they are being neglected. This happens even though Top Management may be happy with how the organization is run and growing in terms of output.
According to Humid, (2013) many students who are pursuing HER as a career are already feeling dissatisfied because organizations are not looking at the employees based view. In the SHRUG model, companies need to firstly look at their external environment (Inkers, et al, 2011). This includes political, environmental, social, technological, economic and legal. In a company like Group Five Construction (Group Five, 2014), the external environment is vital to HER managers forecasting. However, according to Edgar et al, (2005) HER managers need to take into consideration the needs of employees.
With this however, comes the need of possible skills that will support the needs and well-being of the employees which could mean skills in counseling and the ability to communicate effectively which is not always plausible. This SHRUG models links very closely to the Resource based view (RUB).. Resource-based View (RUB) The resource based view according to Collect, (2004); Humid, (201 3), is a natural attraction with competitive advantage and relates closely to workings of the SHRUG model as to improve the organizations performance.
In the resource based view the continuing competitive advantage of an organization can highlight how the internal working of the organization is functioning. The RUB view highlights development, and selection in the current roles of HER managers with regards to the firms resources (Collect, 2004). The organizations resources include physical, Human and Organizational Resources which should be difficult for competitors to copy and to add distinctive value to the organization as a whole (Collect, 2004).
Looking at these three aspects of RUB, one can see that Group Five has adopted this approach to the running of their business. The ways in which they use this can be encapsulated in the following objective for its employees to enjoy “The Group Five Experience”. Examples of achieving this are: Grow your own – proactively entice, train and retain young graduates into a career with Group Five: train and promote – Group Five Academy can offer training and education from school leavers to CEO.
These programs are Group Five specific and are underwritten by credible institutions that provide employees with tertiary qualifications and on the job practical experience and Performance Management – Clear Spa’s and Kepi’s which are reviewed with employees twice annually. This process ensures good performance is consider and poor performance is either managed to improve or dismissal (Group Five, 2014). Soft HARM The next model that is believed to be good in terms of a competitive advantage according to many authors including Edgar and Gear,(2005) is the Hard HARM model.
It is definitely a contrast from the Soft HARM model which focuses more on the attitudes of the employees which include job satisfaction, organizational fairness and organization fairness (Edgar & Gear, 2005). Davidson, Mikhail and Barry, (2011) believe that the way for the employees to become more productive and efficient in their work is by leasing and using their resourcefulness. Greenwood, (2004) also states that in order for the organization to achieve its organizational goals, it tries to gain the commitment of its employees. Hard HARM focuses more on the productivity side of the employees.
The Organization will put more effort into the relationship between HER policies and their business practices. Soft HARM however has the benefit of the employees who receive the benefits from the company (Davidson, Mikhail, & Barry, 201 1) – for example Group Five has a day care facility for parents with young children. They have a gym and hysterical wellness facilities and restaurants and cafeteria so one does not need leave the premises in order to do those activities. The company then gains the benefits from having satisfied and happy employees who are more productive in their day to day work activities.
However Greenwood, (2004) argues that the company only does these things because of the benefits they receive – which sometimes will bring up the ethical question of is it the right way to use your employees? Essentially your employees will be working harder and longer because those everyday activities have been eliminated from their daily lives. Conclusion In conclusion to this essay, in order for an organization to gain and hold onto a competitive advantage, it would be ideal for the HER managers to accept these three models.
Most organizations have a mixture of models that helps it run because of different benefits. The SHRUG model is focused much more on the strategies that will align with the organizations objectives in order to get a competitive advantage. The RUB focuses on the resources an organization has and uses them to benefit the organization the best way it can. Although the soft HARM model has many negative comments from sorority of the authors, it has a place when it comes to an organizations competitive advantage.
A happy and satisfied employee is a more productive and efficient employee. In this model, both the organization as well as the employee benefit.