Managing people is a particular aspect of organizational management. When a number of people carried together and are then offered with the essential equipment and amenities to get a particular job done, their requests to be orderly coordination of effort if the objectives of the group are proficiently accomplished. The methodical, supportive, synchronized effort of a group of people in getting a preferred job professionally accomplished, if persistent for any period, led inexorably to the development of several kinds of formal organization work. Schein (1970) defines organization as “the balanced coordination of the activities of a numeral of people for the achievement of several common explicit purposes or goals through distribution of labor and function and through a hierarchy of power and responsibility” (p. 9).
The need to study and understand how to manage people within the organization has been, for many mangers, an after-the-fact enlightenment. As such, individuals in different occupations refer to the incapability of others to communicate well, the lack of listening skills showed by their colleagues, or the reluctance of subordinates to follow instructions. Individuals will imply that people fail to communicate and they are more or less mystified that other people do not hear them in the way they intended. As a result, experts in human resource development theory and human relations theory have been preaching the need for improved communication for almost four decades (Handy, C. 1993, 104).
Unfortunately, being sentient of the need for improved communication does not constantly translate into better understanding or use. Communications are, by and large, just as poor today as they were twenty or thirty years ago when we first became aware of the need for, and lack of communication in modern organizations (Vecchio, R.P. et. Al. 1992, 81).
Bratton & Gold (2003) state that “to be able to analyze and understand HRM-theory and practice a definition is needed. In their own opinion HRM is a strategic approach to managing employment relations which emphasizes that leveraging people’s capabilities is critical to achieving sustainable competitive advantage. Here the concern is for integration and the behavior of people in the workplace based on ability, motivation, role perception and situational contingencies”. http://www.diva-portal.org/diva/getDocument?urn_nbn_se_vxu_diva-778-2__fulltext.pdf.
In the human relations theory, techniques pierce the scene when it is emphasized that in order to achieve such association contractual agreements and formal mechanisms facilitating contacts and consultation are not adequate; the most significant factor is the atmosphere in which the negotiations take place. While mistrust and enmity prevail, communications become tricky and understanding became impossible. The favorable framework for collaboration is, when self-assurance and two-way communications are fully recognized, not only between negotiating leaders, but also linking the top and the bottom of each hierarchy and among all levels of business and union organization (J.R. Hackman, and G.R. Oldham, 1980).
For example, In Reckitt Benckiser each employee acts on the basis of his or her interpretation of the situation. For example, a clerk categorizes the social transactions in his department, locates himself within it, and there from carries out tasks and obligations. The stability with which members of work units describe their roles comes from sharing the same or similar environmental experiences. Once a particular viewpoint is adopted, it becomes a working conception of the team members, and this frame of reference is brought to bear upon each new employee. The manner in which new employees contribute in training sessions then will, significantly, depend on their personal evaluation of them. This value assessment is a crucial dimension of the learning process. For instance, if a female employee regards herself as a competent person, she acts with confidence. If she regards herself as an “affirmative action hire,” she avoids situations in which her inadequacies might be revealed. Therefore, the manner in which she relates to her co-workers imitates a low self-evaluation.
Implicit in this example is the involvedness of each employee’s phenomenal world, the sum total of his or her perceptions, experiences, and dreams. An optimistic relationship with subordinates is achieved by supervisors only when they can synthesize relevant portions of a subordinate’s world. Language, tone of voice, and nonverbal behaviors are but a few of the things that facilitate or obstruct the job training process. We must not overlook the significance of rhetorical or purposive communication conveyed by managers and subordinates to change the beliefs or behaviors of new employees.
Communication within the organization is metaphorical on two levels to know the amount of power. First, recognized employees have personal and career needs and goals congruent with their own values that give them power. Therefore, consciously or subconsciously, they model behavior that says to the new employee, “My way is the correct way. Follow me and you’ll achieve a degree of success.” To meet the veterans’ rhetorical requirements, newcomers should submit to a modicum of control and curb their tendencies to digress or argue, and engage in face-to-face interaction. The second metaphorical level involves new employees’ personal and job needs, some of which might include not self-disclosing or becoming friendly with the veterans.
Home Depot has become a dominant force in the home improvement business in part by making a conscious effort to learn from every aspect of its business. It continues to attain a phenomenal annual growth rate within the industry by dedicating its people, policies, and practices to developing expertise and learning through all dimensions of its business. Home Depot explicitly pursues objectives to make sure a long-term, competitive advantage through processes supported by HRM to turn experience thoroughly into learning opportunities and by maintaining employee expertise at state-of-the-art levels. Company interactions with employees, customers, vendors, suppliers, and competitors are continually analyzed to reap value-added lessons from a variety of business experiences, whether they involve a sales transaction, a delivery, a management meeting, or an unhappy customer or employee. On one hand, Home Depot invests in developing employees at all levels of the organization. Entry level employees receive nearly four weeks of training and participate in periodic conferences and training sessions at the store and company wide levels. On the other hand, Home Depot values learning from customers in any way, it can. It permits building contractors to use its makeshift classrooms in each store to share their needs and expertise with employees and other customers. Home Depot has added contractor check out areas and new products for first-time home buyers in response to suggestions from both its own employees and customers. Home Depot demonstrates a new and compelling example of the growth that can be achieved when organizations make a conscious effort to learn and develop new expertise from every aspect of their business. Similarly, managers of Ford Motor Company and DuPont have largely attributed recent improvements in business performance to their expertise in applying systems thinking and process knowledge to core business issues (Richard A. Swanson, Richard J. Torraco; 1995: 124-125).
Thus, Countless thousands of HRD professionals in every type of organization are making an attempt to change from activity leaning to results driven HRD. To do so, they should first evolve through phase four and five on their way to phase six because it is not viable to jump over a phase. An evolutionary process entails a slow continuous progression. Therefore, HRM programs should progress through every evolutionary phase, though the amount of time spent on anyone phases diverge from organization to organization. Unfortunately, some HRM programs never develop beyond vendor-driven HRM and the organization suffers as a result.
Studies of leadership have been subjugated by the work of Mayo at Hawthorne and by Lewin’s famous Iowa experiments on approaches of leadership in groups of children. Inspired by such studies and by the broad treatment of leadership in small group theory, students of human relations began methodically to study problems of first level supervision and the relation of the supervisor’s leadership style to workers’ approach and performance.
In brief, it was found that the style of supervision played a main determining role in shaping the attitude and behavior of subordinates. More specifically, a supervisor with permissive or encouraging style of leadership (being people minded to a certain extent than job-minded, trying to realize the problems and needs of his subordinates, etc.) was found to create a supportive group atmosphere and to increase workers’ fulfillment and performance (Gorlin ,H.1992). On the other hand, authoritarian leadership and slam supervision was frequently found to be positively correlated with poor efficiency and morale. As a consequence of such findings, permissive supervision was measured in management textbooks to be the remedy to all industrial ills, and supervisory training programs for the expansion of social skills became very stylish among progressive managers (Zuboff, S. 1998, 37).
The Mayoites concentrated their consideration on the behavioral variables of the organization.
The formal variables (i.e., rules and activities requisite by the organization) and the diverse values and patterns of behavior which the organization members have obtained outside the plant, comprise the boundary conditions, the restrictive context into which will be establish the activity to be studied. Thus, those two sets of variables, though recognized as important determinants of behavior, are measured as givens, outside the line of differentiation. They are not to be explained or studied in themselves; to a certain extent they are going to be taken into contemplation only as they enter into the individual’s characterization of the situation.
Finally, management’s abandon to take concern into the informal organization and its values, results in the collapse of communications between the top and the bottom of the hierarchy. Communications downwards are weakened as management’s orders are based on the hommo-economicus assumption concerning workers’ behavior; communications upwards suffer even more as no information concerning the informal organization of the plant is conveyed. In brief in order to restore good communications, management should not try to destroy the informal organization of the plant; it should rather take it into consideration and ensure (mainly through supervisors trained in human relations) that the informal norms in concord with organization goals. While this is achieved, the informal organization, in place of proving an obstruction is transformed into the major driving force for the attainment of the firm’s objectives.
Communication is between groups and individuals relatively than top to bottom. Likert’s (1967) principle of accommodating relationships attained:
The leadership and other progression of the organization should be such as to ensure a maximum prospect that in all interactions and all relations with the organization each member will, in light of his surroundings, values, desires, and hopes, view the experience as supportive and one which builds and retains his sense of personal worth and significance. (p. 103)
Thus, The social edifice and production of distinctiveness, of course, entail deliberation of work organizations as a strong influence. In the work setting, at its most fundamental level, the individual and the organization can be thought to function in a self and other association. Usually the field has viewed this affiliation in manner constant with the precepts of the separation thesis and usually describing the relationship as a form of socialization. The typical depiction of the dynamics of this affiliation is that put forward in Edgar Schein’s (1970) notion of the psychological indenture. Schein suggested that the psychological contract concerned reciprocation contribution and incentive where the employee and employer became affianced in an interactive process of shared influence and bargaining.
Schein clinched the work of Etzioni (1961) to suggest that the types of employee involvement were a usual outcome of the rewards and kinds of power used in an organization. What was in fact exchanged and the psycho dynamics involved were never made clear. The prospective for abuse of these processes, is an arena likewise neglected. Management systems have changed very much, although many other aspects of customary social values remain popular and unswerving with the past. That social values have stayed almost the same as the management system has altered is a serious drawback to clarifications from this approach.
The management system is distinguished as the effect of choices made by top management while they enter strategic relationships to find the best way of attaining strategic goals. Most of the features of the Japanese management system may be chosen through balanced choices made to achieve goals. From this viewpoint we would propose that a clear statement by top management of a business dogma would generate strategic decisions with greater veracity. A business group would then be more effectual in obtaining resources, and mainly in securing investment funds from its major bank, which characteristically will have an enduring horizon somewhat than a short-term orientation toward profits in the next quarter. As this may seem commendable, and at its peak in the seventies and eighties it was very successful, the use-by date of fostering enduring planning, hastened investment and rapid innovation is evidently past. The best-managed organizations recognize this and this understanding is behind the many subtle changes. As their strategic choices made logic in the climate that reigned in the past, they did not subsequently to the bubble economy malformed. The need for a change of paradigms was evident.
As a manager I personally believe that Management’s stress on short-term profit expansion will mean that internal competition for the same funds slated for social responsibility investment will become more passionate among the internal managers. Keeping internal company precedence straight and yet having a sagacity of social responsibility thus becomes an intricate balancing act. Remaining the company in business to stay people employed and still engendering a logical profit for its stockholders are also primary concerns and top precedence of the company.
Large companies, with great planning, policy, and strategy staffs, can make the “doing good to doing better” idea work. On the other hand, medium-sized and smaller companies with restricted resources might have serious problems in pertaining this idea of social responsibility.
Two main obstacles that must be overcome for this conception to work, even to a limited extent, can both be listed under the heading of “education.” To achieve the ideas, goals, and objectives requires developing a company culture adjusted to such an idea. Conditioning company culture needs a wide-ranging educational process, which takes time and management commitment.
Of equal significance, however, is educating the stakeholder to recognize what is going on in industry and what industry is trying to do. The stakeholder as well has a social accountability to be aware of and appreciate the socioeconomic process.
Studies also have shown that future businesspeople and decision makers get their ideas and ideas concerning business mainly from the mass media and from their teachers. Therefore, an informed and educated employee and citizenries are as well significant and necessary cornerstones of social responsibility.
Most of the literature and majority people’s understanding places the major compulsion for socially accountable actions on business. This is not a true or complete picture; the stakeholders as well have certain responsibilities and obligations to business, and it is a joint street. Therefore, business has definite responsibilities and compulsions to its employees and the employees have certain responsibilities and compulsions to the business.
Etzioni, Amitai. 1961. A Comparative Analysis of Complex Organizations. New York, Free Press.
Gordon, Judith R. Organizational Behavior: A Diagnostic Approach. 7th edition. Prentice Hall, 2002.
Gorlin ,H.(1992).An overview of corporate personnel practices.Personal Journal 61 125 – 130.
Handy, C. (1993). Understanding organizational. 4th ed., Penguin, London
J.R. Hackman, and G.R. Oldham, Work Redesign. AddisonWesley, Reading, MA 1980.
John Bratton & Jeffrey Gold (3rd edn., 2003), Human Resource Management Theory and Practice, MacMillan, London http://www.diva-portal.org/diva/getDocument?urn_nbn_se_vxu_diva-778-2__fulltext.pdf.
Likert R. ( 1967). The human organization. New York: McGraw-Hill
Richard A. Swanson, Richard J. Torraco; The Strategic Roles of Human Resource Development, Human Resource Planning, Vol. 18, 1995
Schein, E. (1970). Organizational psychology, (2nded.). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Vecchio, R.P. et. Al. (1992). Organizational behavior: life at work in Australia, HBJ Publishers, Sydney
Zuboff, S. (1998) In the age of the smart machine: the future of work and power. New York: Basic Books.