Evolution of HRM

Gunnigle et al (2006:2) identified a number of developments which had a critical impact on HRM.  Welfare Tradition - a series of voluntary initiatives to improve workers conditions. Modern HR practices such as employee assistance are ultimately concerned with workers welfare.  Scientific Management - Welfare tradition succumbed to the research work of FW Taylor 'Taylorism' which suggested notion that labour efficiency led to greater levels of organisational efficiency and profitability. The 'people' resource was similar to other inanimate resources. Emphasis on job analysis, time and motion studies and the creation of incentives. The influence on HR included: a) shift away from employee-oriented agenda to a profitability agenda. b) Greater weight on careful selection and systematic training  to maximise efficiency standards c) Increased attention to job design, working conditions and payments systems. Behavioural Science Movement - Developed body of knowledge including, polices related to selection, training, motivation, Main theorists include Elton Mayo, Roethlisberger and Dickson (Hawthorn Studies). Research indicated that employee behaviour and performance was influenced by motivation and needs as well as by working conditions and payment practices. The Hawthorn Studies caused : a) shift from psycho-physiological model to a socio-emotional one. b) fundamental importance of the workers attitude to the job and their performance From Personnel Management to HRM - The main distinction between Personnel include the following Personnel Management saw the workforce as having less influence on strategic decision than HRM. Personnel Management was reactive and short-term whereas HRM is proactive and long-term. Personnel Management relied on control whereas HRM facilitated employee commitment.  Personnel Management has an acceptance of conflict of interests whereas HRM has a unitarist perspective with no conflict of interest.  Personnel Management operated on the basis of a collective nature whereas HRM relied on individualistic relations.  Personnel Management had aims which were grounded on cost effectiveness whereas HRM aims at maximising HR utilisation.  Personnel Management normally operates in a bureaucratic structure whereas HRM operates effectively in a fluid and organic structure. 

New Page