Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
HARD & SOFT HRM (CRITIQUE (No universal policy- no Holy Grail, Human…
HARD & SOFT HRM
CRITIQUE
-
-
-
-
assumption are so divergent, they cannot both properly be incorporated within singles model of human resource management
the opposing nature of the models 's underlying assumptions leads us to question the validity of constructing models of HRM on the basis of both soft and hard models
conflicting views and versions are further compounded by the conceptual difficulties contained within them, particularly concerning the notions of strategic integration and commitment
-
conceptualisation of HRM along the hard-soft dimension are plagued with inconsistencies and ambiguities
-
if such conceptual weaknesses exist within models of HRM, how valid can they be as the basis of normative theories?
HARD
Guest 1987
- High Commitment or High Performance
-
often associated with exploitative practices: intensive working, low pay, low levels of job security and,emplyee commitment
-
stresses the quantattive , calculative, the "headcount resource"
-
-
control is more concerned with performance management and tight control over individual activities- ultimite goal being competitive advantage for the organisation
-
SOFT
emphasis on developing and investing in Human Capital, Nurturing & Reward
-
associated with the human relations movement, the utilisation of individual talents and McGregor's Theory Y perspective on individual s (development-humanism)
equated with the concept of a 'high commitment work system' - self regulated rather than controlled = based on trust (Walton 1985)
-
-
commitment and self-direction, with the dual aims of meeting the needs of the organisation and of the individual.
Prieto 1993- 3 Types of flexibility: numerical, wage, functional
-
emphasis on developing and investing in human capital, nurturing employee loyalty and providing well-rewarded and satisfying work
managers become: enablers, empowerers, facilitators
HARVARD
Beer et al 1984
-
considers situational factors, stakeholder interests
-
made up of various interest groups, conflicting, but equally legitimate
-
-
HRM
-
diametrically opposed along a number of dimensions, and they have been used by many commentators as devices to categorise approaches to managing people according to develop mental humanist or utilitarian-instrumental principles
theoretical view: the underlying conflicts and tensions contained within the model have not been sufficiently explored and, from a practical perspective , available empirical evidence would suggest that neither model accurately represents what is happening within organisations (Storey 1992)
-
Guest 1987- in seeking to define HRM , identifies two dimensions : soft-hard & loose-tight
-
draw heavily on the work of American HRM academics in drawing a distinction between the two forms - Harvard model ( beer et al 1985) & Michigan model (Fombrun et al 1982)
-
the rhetoric adopted by the companies frequently embraces the tenets of the soft, commitment model.
Reality= employees more concern3ed with strategic control (hard)
the distinction between rhetoric and reality needs to be taken into account in conceptualisations of human resource management
-
MICHIGAN
-
-
underpins both authoritarian and paternalistic, by virtue of their position of authority
PLUARILIST
-
-
differing needs of the organisation and individuals are acknowledged and addressed- collaborative HRM
COMPARISON
Storey 1992 : "what is striking is that the same term HRM is the capable of signalling diametrically oppositesets of assumptions"
tension and conflict between events of self-expression and high trust contained within the the soft model, and direction and low trust within the hard model (Noon 1992)
derive from different intellectual traditions and incorporate diametrically opposed assumptions about human nature and managerial control
THEORY Y
"man will exercise self-direction and self-contro in the service of objectives to which he is committed" (McGregor 1960)
employees will work best (increasing org performance) if fully committed to the organisation (Beaumont 1992)
commitment will be generated if: employees are trusted, trained and developed and allowed to work autonomously and have control- Guest 1987
STOREY 1992
Identifies four features of an HRM approach as incorporating both soft elements such as commitment, and hard elements such as strategic direction.
:red_cross:the incorporation of both soft and hard elements within one theory or model is highly problematic because each rests on a different set of assumptions in the two key areas of human nature and managerial control strategies
-
-
-