For any social group to perform its tasks efficiently and achieve its common objectives, the management of its most important resources - the people - is of utmost importance. According to Lundy O (1994) ,until about the 1970s the task of ‘finding and controlling people’ was handled by Personnel Management which was largely an administrative function, dealing with the management and control of subordinates.
The concept of Human Resource Management developed with a more strategic level of thinking about the nature and role of people (as total 24hr per day human beings) working in organizations which are ‘cultures’ in their own right.
Recent thinking has moved from the control-based model to the compliance model. The soft edge of the latter involves eliciting employee commitment and expecting effectiveness and efficiency to follow. This has come to be known as the Harvard Model of Human Resource Management and was proposed by Beer et al in 1984. The hard edge involves ridding the organization of unnecessary layers of middle management which, when stripped of control functions, have very little by way of value added. This has come to be known as the Michigan Model of Human Resource Management and proposed by Fombrun, Tichy and Devanna also in 1984.
These two models can in in fact, be traced back to the work of McGregor ( 1960), who even used the terminology 'hard' and 'soft' to characterize forms of managerial control
McGregor was concerned with how to foster an organizational environment conducive to innovation. He concluded that most managerial control strategies were based on views of human nature contained in Theory X (such as, that people dislike work), leading to tight managerial control through close direction. This has overtones of the emphasis within the hard model on strategic direction, integration, and the use of performance management techniques such as appraisal.
Theory Y, on the other hand, opens up the notion that...