Introduction
According to research, individualism is a self-orientation that emphasizes on self-reliance and direct search of entity ambitions that may or may not be constant with inset aims (Harbridge & Crawford 2000, p.67). In addition, it also emphasizes the willingness to face affiliates of the inset to which an individual fit in and an ethnicity where people obtain self-importance from their personal achievements. In most cases, people in an individualistic environment are provoked by self-centeredness and attainment of private goals.
Such a group of people are reluctant to make contribution to cooperative ventures except that their own hard work are identified and desired instead to benefits from the endeavor of others. On the other hand, collectivism comprises the combination of personal welfare to the objectives of the broader work group. It involves allocation, collaboration, as well as group agreement. It shows concern over the welfare of the group and aggression headed for out-group affiliates.
The extent to which there has been a shift from collectivism to individualism in the management of the employment relationship
In most circumstance, collectivists feel that they are an obligatory fraction of the cluster, and therefore will willingly continue to make contributions without apprehension for improvement being taken of them or for whether other are handling their fraction.
This is because they are always sensitivity individually accountable for the group creation and are thus oriented towards allocation group rewards. Many organizations depict both functional and dysfunctional features concerning the application of communism and individuality in the administration of remuneration within the firm (Guest 2008, p.24).
On the contrary, collectivism managerial method in return provides the benefits of more harmonious relationship among employees and the human resource manager. In this type of relationship within an organization, larger synergies may be seen from the incorporated efforts of people with different abilities, while people may take pleasure in a network of communal support (Foster 2005, p.56). On the contrary, there are high chances of the loss of an individual’s self to the group or the persona of the firm while posing high chances of relying on the firm emotionally.
In general, the world has been transformed at an incredibly high rate in the recent past. The various establishments in the past century have created a superior influence on the world internationally (Dunlop 2000, p.18). For instance, the living standards and the way of life has been transformed and is a lot different to what it is right now that what it was in the previous days.
Example of such transformation being experienced currently and is affecting the entire world on a larger extent includes the shift from collectivism to individualism. There is an increasing rate in the shift from collectivism to individualism in major parts of the world and it is highly experienced at the workplaces particularly in the management of employment relationships. Literature reveals highly that the change from collectivism to individualism in employment relations has declined rapidly causing profound employment relationship changes.
A significant number of studies argue that a change towards the individualization of employment relations is surpassing the traditional collectivist method, with the individual concession of modified employment agreements becoming increasingly more privileged larger than the collective conciliation between trade unions and management. According to industrial relations literature, individualization is the reduction in the practical role of trade unions in establishing the content of employment contracts (Gunnigle 2008, p.86).
This necessitates a sizeable change in the area of work relations, as collective bargaining has been the position connote of managing the employment agreement for the main part of the twentieth century. New Zealand is the best example of a country that is highly experiencing the shift from collectivism to individualism. This is because the country is facing work disagreement between progressive supermarkets and their employees, instigated by management changing employees from collective agreements onto individual agreements.
It is noted that individualism and collectivism tend to rotate around the employment conformity, which is demonstrated as the key lawful method for developing the regulations of work for the manager and individual employee. Studies explain employment agreement as the result of a transaction that take in both the privileges and the commitments of the employee (Epstein 2001, p.49).
These privileges cover commonly related factors like forfeit and periphery advantages. Nonetheless, agreements also do regulate the responsibilities placed on workers inclusive of workloads, as well as descriptions of job. Therefore, these are components that can be discussed either in a collective or an individual manner.
The extent to which there has been a shift from collectivism to individualism in the management of the employment relationship includes the corresponding decrease in trade union association and thus trade union supremacy. This is because it is difficult for collectivism to continue operating without the presence of trade union partnership.
Research shows partnership fees are the vital way for trade unions to gather their income, and from this it can be enlarged that if partnership reduces, then so does the trade unions income and thus supremacy and financial capability to defend its members. It is true that trade unions are the communal force that promotes collective contract within employment agreements, therefore, the weaker they become, the weaker the impact of collective agreement.
The foremost influences causing this change comprises of minor institution, which are known to have great power over trade unions and collective agreement, thus having an immense influence on trade unions supremacy in the workplace (Graham 2011, p.43). The key secondary institution includes the governments and their decisions on legislation. However, research reveals that the government and employers strong support for trade unions has declined completely.
In addition, other dynamics carried out by managers also contribute to lack of recognition of trade unions resulting into the individualization of employment relations. Certainly, it is normally in the managers best interests not to recognize unions and go for individual agreements. Other researchers argue that managers may exploit the individual workers in cases where there are no trade unions due to extreme pressure to accept reforms, almost resulting into the level of intimidations over their terms and conditions of employment (Jenkins & Klarsfeld 2002, p.56).
In most circumstances, workers are always involved in low level of agreement during the cooperation and low levels of employee participation in change within organizations where individual agreements are in place. Therefore, such extents make people to shift from collectivism to individualism.
This is because such shifts makes the organizations to more easily create new payment approaches and grade structures, while at the same time making the organization to connect the management of work more to the produce market than the exterior employment market.
The extent to which there has been a shift from collectivism to individualism in the management of the employment relationship involves the preference of the unitary organization of work relations within an organization compared to a pluralist structure.
Therefore, the unitary method is associated with individualization of the employment conventions, where the workers and the managers bargain together to discuss the requisites and circumstances of employment agreement (Kim 2005, p.90). On the contrary, the collective method is seen as being extremely pluralist in nature due to trade unions from outside the workplace being brought in to bargain employment conditions or advocate for the rights of the employees.
It is noted that managers have changed their ways in regard to trade unions in order to replicate this change to individualization by choosing to compete with trade unions instead of fighting them. This is achieved through the reduction of the workers needs to consider union partnership.
According to research, there is a connection between the introduction of human resource management and the ever-increasing rise in the decline or shift from collectivism to individualism (Rose 2009, p.45). This is human resource is viewed as a mechanism that promotes individualism and there is no trade unions in such systems.
The current way of government thinking as well as human resource theories and strategies congregate in that they both promote the individualism at the expense of collectivism. In most cases, the human resource management motivates an individualism system to employee management, while the personnel management emphasizes a collectivism system, and thus the change from collectivism to individualism.
Therefore, the extent to which there has been a shift from collectivism to individualism in the management of the employment relationship involves situations where there is need to create self-control, commitment, and a flexible and decentralized structure, as well as high confidentiality employee relations.
All this is only found within an individualism environment since collectivism is dictatorial in nature (Brown 2000, p.78). In most cases, human resources management promotes and motivates young managers to adopt superior freedom in making decision on how to achieve benefit needs, inclusive of decisions on the process of labor management within an organization.
Furthermore, the extent to which there has been a shift from collectivism to individualism in the management of the employment relationship involves the situations where employees desire to be empowered through the human resource management. It is revealed that empowerment is based on adding workers task based participation and attitudinal change. Empowerment schemes are extremely direct and individualistic in nature, basically providing employees more power to come up with decisions within their working places (Williams & Adam-Smith 2008, p.76).
For instance, just like the managers have the power to make decisions concerning their pay levels, therefore, the individuals workers are also empowered even more in increasing their capabilities and supremacy in making decisions and take relevant actions where they would not have been in position to do that in the collectivism approach. Other sources that are viewed to be part of the human resource management motivate the individualization of employment relationships.
Concentration on human resource activities such as equal allocation of resources, participation by workers, as well as shareholding by individual workers leads to individualization. All these activities are equal to the employee empowerment because they try to put in place the goals and objectives of workers with those of the organization through utilizing integrated achievements.
Another extent that has led to the shift from collectivism to individualism in the management of the employment relationship includes the ever-changing economic and political climate (Tuckman & Finnerty 1998, p.23). For instance, due to huge number of unemployment within the country, the effect is always felt on trade unions, which as a result decline, because of the development of jobs in the service section and change from manufacturing to service.
Unfortunately, trade unions do not perform well in service sectors because the large of workers in the service sector includes the casuals, part-time workers and temporary workers. In most cases, it becomes extremely difficult for trade unions to persuade such people to join the team since most of them are not easily found, thus leading to the decrease in trade union partnership levels and decline in collectivism approach.
Conclusion
In conclusion, individualism is a self-orientation that emphasizes self-sufficiency and control, as well as the search of individual dreams that may or may not be reliable with in group goals. On the contrary, collectivism consists of the subordination of individual significance to the intentions of the broader work group. It involves allocation, teamwork, as well as group agreement. This research aimed at finding the various extents to which there has been a shift from collectivism to individualism in the management of the employment relationship.
For instance, the preference of the single organization of work relations within an organization compared to a multiple structure and the corresponding decrease in trade union association and thus trade union supremacy. This is because it is difficult for collectivism to continue operating without the presence of trade union partnership.
References
Brown, S 2000, ‘The employment contract: From collective procedures to individual rights’, British Journal of Industrial Relations, vol.34, no.8, pp.611-629.
Dunlop, J 2000, Industrial relations systems, Carbondale: Southern Illinois
Epstein, R 2001, ‘Employment and labor law reform in New Zealand’, Western Reserve Journal of International Law, vol.33, no.3, pp.361-379.
Foster, B 2005, Employer attitudes as a factor in union stagnation in New Zealand. Web.
Graham, H 2011, Employee relations, Cornell: Financial time, Pitman Publishing, Maryland.
Guest, D 2008, ‘Human resource management and industrial relations’, Journal of Management Studies, vol.24, no.5, pp.503-521.
Gunnigle, P 2008, ‘Counterpoising collectivism: Performance-related pay and industrial relations in Greenfield sites’, British Journal of Industrial Relations, vol.36, no.4, pp.565-579.
Harbridge, R & Crawford, A 2000, ‘The effects of the Employment Contracts Act on representation and collective bargaining in the thoroughbred racing and trade unionism: A case for the union voice’, Personnel Review, vol.27, no.6, pp.448-459.
Jenkins, A & Klarsfeld, A 2002, ‘Understanding ‘individualization’ in human resource management: The case of the ‘skill-based pay’ in France’, International Journal of Human Resource Management, vol.13, no.1, pp.198-21.
Kim, U 2005, Individualism and collectivism: a psychological, cultural and ecological analysis, NIAS Press, New York.
Rose, E 2009, Employment relations, Pearson Education, Harlow.
Tuckman, A., & Finnerty, C 1998, Individual contracts, collective bargaining, University Press, California.
Williams, S & Adam-Smith, D 2008, Contemporary employment relations: a critical introduction, Oxford University Press, Oxford.