Best Practice
The yield expected from successful human resource management (HRM) or development (HRD) differs greatly depending on where the organisation is based, its’ culture, resources, size and socio-economic climate. Therefore, it is imperative that the development and delivery of improved human capital via HRM is rooted in the needs of the organisation rather than opting for an ‘off the shelf’ closed option such as ‘Best Practise’ or high performance work practices. Theorists have yet to settle on a definitive model for best practise, which itself suggests a certain degree of flexibility is built into the interpretation of what it could be. Here lies the first contradiction to the pro best practise argument as these rigid principals are yet to be defined. Debatably, best practise principals should be enforceable regardless of the organisational context and strategy.
Effective HRM is, undoubtedly, influenced by factors which include culture, global, national and local context, size, wealth, product or service industry. These factors will determine the organisational strategy and influence how HRM is delivered within it. Schuler and Jackson (1987) argued the case for the Competitive Strategy to underpin the delivery of HRM with particular emphasis on cost, quality and innovation leading to firm performance. Theorists such as Storey (1992) and Ulrich et al (2005) endeavour to map how HRM is administered citing the importance of strategically aligned Business Partner’s and Change Makers who can readily covert to changing contexts and employment law. These HR models are contradictory to the best practise concepts of ‘one size fits all’ due to the requirement for in built flexibility and rapid change concepts.
HRM and its’ links to improved performance has, in itself, been difficult to measure. In Britain, Cully et al’s (1998) Workplace Employee Relations Study in 1995 lead the way by surveying a random sample HR professionals in 2100 workplaces. A further 28,000
Effective HRM is, undoubtedly, influenced by factors which include culture, global, national and local context, size, wealth, product or service industry. These factors will determine the organisational strategy and influence how HRM is delivered within it. Schuler and Jackson (1987) argued the case for the Competitive Strategy to underpin the delivery of HRM with particular emphasis on cost, quality and innovation leading to firm performance. Theorists such as Storey (1992) and Ulrich et al (2005) endeavour to map how HRM is administered citing the importance of strategically aligned Business Partner’s and Change Makers who can readily covert to changing contexts and employment law. These HR models are contradictory to the best practise concepts of ‘one size fits all’ due to the requirement for in built flexibility and rapid change concepts.
HRM and its’ links to improved performance has, in itself, been difficult to measure. In Britain, Cully et al’s (1998) Workplace Employee Relations Study in 1995 lead the way by surveying a random sample HR professionals in 2100 workplaces. A further 28,000