Human Resource Management (HRM)

Aligning  Organizacional Structure With Business Goals

The key focus in Human Resource Management (HRM) is the identification of appropriate HR’s strategy, structure and systems within the context of value creation, that it require for the business / organization.

Both HRM and Organization Strategy (Organizational Design as well) must be aligned. Indeed, the main issue is to find out how HRM strategy adds value to the organization.

Lets see the following chat:

The HRM adds value to the business, doesn’t it?
Depends. If HRM has a strategy aligned to the business, then yes!
How is this? The HRM and their inherent area not always have been empowered enough within the Organization, in other cases, HR people don’t full understand or fullfil how to add value to the business strategy.

What methodologies HRM should have?

HRM is a field directed at interventions in the processes of human systems (formal and informal groups, organizations, communities, and societies) in order to increase their effectiveness and health using a variety of disciplines, principally applied behavioral sciences. HR requires practitioners to be conscious about the values guiding their practice and focuses on achieving its results through people.”

But that is not enough to get a HRM aligned with the business strategy

It is necesary the mastering of the following fields:
1. Stategic Planning
2. Customer satisfaction
3. Financial performance
4. Competitive advantage
5. Process Management

 

An example

Regional Airline Balanced Scorecard

Mission: Dedication to the highest quality of Customer Service delivered with a sense of warmth, friendliness, individual pride, and Company Spirit. Vision: Continue building on our unique position — the only short haul, low-fare, highfrequency, point-to-point carrier in America. Read More

Performance Appraisal and Individual Potential Management

Have you ever experienced this?

You have promoted the best salesman in your team to Sales Supervisor position. But as a result he turned out to be a bad Supervisor and you have also lost  a good seller.

This happens more often than you think.
The reason is that companies often promote people based on their current
performance, without considering the potential for people to serve in positions
of greater complexity. And the current performance of the people in charge can be measured by applying different models of performance management, based on quantitative and/or qualitative variables. In turn, the potential applied as the current capacity of the people ( C.A.C. ) of the acronym Current Applied Capability , it can also be established by measuring the complexity of the information that people are able to process.
The latter is observable, for example, and skills can be measured by checking
behaviors associated with them ; the C.A.C. It can be established by observation of
mental processes that the person is able to perform.

Mental processes ordered  of increasing complexity :

  1. Concrete Verbal
  2. Symbolic Verbal Representation
  3. Abstract Conceptual
  4. Universals Ideas

Fuente: Jaques & Cason

Performance Management: Help motivate or to frustrate people?

 

Usually companies apply performance management tools based on subjective indicators, or they use ambiguous scales for measurement (e.g. “lower than expected”; “meets expected”, “good”; “outstanding”). With this, the objectivity is lost, because there is not an unique meaning for words like “good” or “excellent”. This is relevant because objectivity and credibility are important requirements for a performance management system.

The workers avoid to attend the performance interview, as they perceive that it does not add value, and they feel that it is a stressful situation, negative to their work environment and engagement. As a result, the leaders of the organization show reluctant to apply performance evaluation.

How can we avoid falling into this situation?

Unfortunately there is no single recipe or solution to this problem, since this is a result of several factors; which will be identified in order of importance:

  1. Lack off an organizational measure culture.
  2. Ambiguous mission statements or without objectives
  3. Supervisors not assuming their coach role.

If you want read more , please Like the article