The foundations of public HRM
Scholars have asserted that effective human resource management is fundamental towards realizing the success of a public organization (Hays & Kearney, 2001). Traditionally, the personnel manager (PM) was charged with the responsibility of effective human resource management.
However, prior to experiencing the incessant transformation, the management of people within public institutions was left to the HRM that relied on comparatively old theories, processes, and goals. The following perspectives detail the foundations for the public HRM systems.
Traditional theories
The normative HRM theory
The public HRM systems are founded on the normative theory that embraces both the soft and inflexible or hard HRM concepts under which the human resources management basics are anchored. In fact, the hard or inflexible human resource management model forms the HRM customary strategic base.
The hard HRM model has its foundation on the Harvard conception, which was developed to link the organizational strategies to the management of employees (Guest, 1999).
The inflexible human resource management model emphasizes the correlation amid the operational units and procedures namely work laws, contract consultations, productivity assessments, reimbursement and rewards, staffing, the psychoanalysis of employment, and staff scheduling to the adopted commerce strategies.
Thompson (2006) claims that these tend to apply the public institutions wellbeing in excess of the contradictory happiness and aspirations of the workforces. The theory recognizes the public institutions employees as unreceptive resources, which can be used and disposed by such organizations at will.
On the other hand, the soft human resource management model was derived from the Michigan HR perspective and it forms the contemporary strategic HRM approach foundation. Instead of seeing the human capital as ‘resources’, the soft HRM concept observes human capital as public organizations ‘assets’.
Besides, the soft HRM concept puts emphasis on public institutions rapport building, organizational culture, headship development, conflict management, as well as organizational development as foundations for ensuring performance and enhancing trust by means of cooperation (Gratton et al, 1999).
The perspective worked under the supposition that anything that was perceived to be good for public institutions was equally good for the organizational workforces.
The critical HRM theory
According to (Berman, Bowman and West (2012), the critical human resource management theory is a conception that reacts in opposition to the normative model. In fact, the critical premises for HRM tend to draw attention to certain inbuilt inconsistencies found within the HRM normative model.
The critical HRM theory supports the existing rhetoric space given that public institutions allege that they are following the soft human resources management principles while they really implement the ‘inflexible HRM’.
Gill (2007) conducted a research study, which confirmed that whereas various public institutions alleged that workforce is amongst their key essential capital and claim to be making various dedications for their respective growth, development, and wellbeing the certainty is that public institutions implement the strategic controls founded on the inflexible HRM.
Besides, the interests of the public institutions usually get precedence over and above human being or single worker (Noon, 1994).
The Human Resource Management Behavioral theory
In the deliberation of workers’ behavior as the intermediary amid the organizational presentation and strategy, HRM behavioral theory finds its pedigree from the theory of contingency.
Having power over the behavior and attitudes of members of staff is the major intention of human resource management intercession as apprehended by this theory. This suits a variety of the adopted strategies intended to acquire the preferred performance.
Rather than this theory basing itself on the human resources’ aptitudes, knowledge, and skills, it derives it basis on the workers behavior (Kane, Crawford & Grant, 1999). For example, a good labor force is necessary for an institution that is aspiring to innovate.
This workforce will however display high degrees of creativity, teamwork, exceptional quality, continued focus, risk-taking tendencies, and concerns over high quality that emerges as innovative behaviors.
Generally, to reinforce and inculcate such pattern of behaviors in the labor force is the main role of HRM in such perspective (Hays & Kearney, 2001).
The HRM systems theory
This model brings the systems theory into play to describe an institution in regards to the amount of production, throughput, and input. In fact, the business transaction mixes up in the entire systems within the adjacent milieu.
The personnel dealings put in order encompass the service or ensuing product output, energy make over inside the system at throughput, as well as input. On the other hand, the provisions for communication on discrepancies come about via the pessimistic feedback loop (Berman, Bowman, & West, 2012).
In the systems theory outlook, the role of human resource management encompasses making the exchanges possible within the surroundings found in the open system. The other role of HRM is to set up a contact device to bumper the core of expertise from the environs inside the systems that are closed.
Moreover, to make certain that there is contentment in jobs, systems approach employs other methods as well as the behavior supervision by way of pay systems and performance appraisal. Therefore, this makes productivity better in view of the fact that the employees’ work in accordance with the institutional policies.
Finally, the systems perspective in guaranteeing the necessitated experience in the labor force, it ensures competence administration (Berman, Bowman, & West, 2012). In return, these skills and competencies make the input that an organization calls for.
The HRM theory of Agency or Transaction Cost
The agency or Transaction Cost approach is one of the numerous theories of human resource management.
This perspective holds into the view that, depending on the efforts of other people in a faction and decreased individual presentation is the natural and resilient inclination of persons in a group operation (Houston & Cartwright, 2007).
Actually, conflicting interests regularly take place at the time when an individual hand over a contractual obligation to a different personality. Just like the other perspectives, the promotion of substitute means of behavioral management is the main task of the human resource management.
The role reduces the prices and trims down the causes of inconsistent interests in the organization. In this perspective humanizing productivity and setting up efficient systems of control is done through the prevention of job shrinking and scrutinizing the behavior of workers.
The second approach in this model is to augment personal performance by endowing workers with incentives like job discharge, impetus, and recompense. Thus, the espousal approaches that reduces the costs of transaction is necessary to the organizational human resource management (Houston & Cartwright, 2007).
Goals and processes of the public HRM system
The traditional HRM system played a decisive role in all public institutions with respect to resource management. For instance, the HRM goal was to ensure that all institutions had the right workforce needed and whenever they were needed by the organizations.
In fact, the customary HRM managed and created the employees rewards and compensation plans as well as the training, selection, and staffing of new organizational workers (Daley, 2006).
Furthermore, the HRM system was set to assist public institutions on matters relating to the employees resignation, retirements, agreement terminations, and disciplining.
The HRM was perceived to play a significant role of fostering democracy in public institutions. For example, the traditional HRM systems were aimed at ensuring that the public organizations workforces were treated both justifiably and fairly when they work in diverse environments (Wright & McMahan, 1992).
Logical and informed case
The aspects of the foundations of public HRM that must be retained
Under the foundations of the public HRM systems, the best practices prescriptions ought to be retained. In fact, both the soft and hard HRM concepts under which the human resources management basics are anchored should be retained.
Retaining the hard HRM model will help public HRM in linking the organizational strategies to the management of employees (Blyton & Turnbull, 1994).
This aspect will help public organizations in linking work laws, job consultation, productivity assessments, reimbursement and reward, staffing, the psychoanalysis of work and worker scheduling to the assumed trade and commercial strategies.
Conversely, the soft human resource management model derived from the Michigan HR perspective should also be retained. The aspect will help the public HRM in placing more value on the organizational human capital by seeing such resources as public institutions most valued assets.
Besides, the soft HRM concept aspects will help public institutions to build viable relationship, create a favorable organizational culture, develop good corporate leadership, and properly manage conflicts so as to improve on the organizational development, enhance employees’ performance, and build trust amongst employees via cooperation (Coggburn, 2005).
Various goals and processes should be retained. For instance, the resource management processes including issues relating to the employees resignation, retirements, contract terminations, and disciplining must be retained and adopted in the new public HRM system.
In addition, the customary public HRM employees’ rewards and compensation plans as well as the human resources training, selection, and recruitment strategies used in getting new organizational workers should be retained (Coursey, 2005).
Retaining these public human resource management aspects will assist the HRM to ensure that all institutions had the correct labor force required and at whatever time they were needed by the organizations.
Changes to be made to public HRM to make it more vibrant for the current era
The public HRM systems have been focusing on the workforce behaviours, performances, competencies, practices, and systems reflecting the management, growth, and development of the strategic organizational human capital.
Despite concentrating on the HRM administrative aspects, the level of organizational operations have continuously changed requiring new paradigms in the management of human resources (Kellough & Selden, 2003).
Thus, for the public HRM to be more vibrant for the current era, it is important that the HRM system should be transformed to incorporate the strategic business or value added component.
Instead of just focusing on the employees’ benefits and compensation administrations, workforce development and trainings, performance evaluations, as well as recruitment and selections, the strategic component should be added to the public HRM system so that it can effectively utilize resources and have arrangements that are more elastic (Truss, 2001).
These will help the public institutions to realize their managerial objectives and goals besides gaining the requisite competitive market advantage.
Hence, the strategic component should be incorporated so that instead of focusing on individual performances, the public HRM system concentrates on organizational performances.
Finally, more stress should be put on the public HRM system trade tribulations resolutions such as the unconstructive and constructive complementarities instead of the solitary HRM practices.
References
Berman, E., Bowman, J. & West, J. (2012). Human resource management in public service paradoxes, processes, and problems. London: SAGE Publications.
Blyton, P. & Turnbull, P. (1994). Reassessing human resource management. London: Sage.
Coggburn, J. (2005). The benefits of human resource centralization: insights from a survey of human resource directors in a decentralized state. Public Administration Review, 65(4): 424-435.
Coursey, D. (2005). Human resource management challenges in government information technology. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 25(3): 203-206.
Daley, D. (2006). Strategic human resource management in public personnel management: current concerns, future challenges. White Plains, NY: Longman.
Gill, C. (2007). A review of the critical perspective on human resource management. Melbourne: Melbourne Business School.
Gratton, L., Hope-Hailey, V., Stiles, P., & Truss, C. (1999). Strategic human resource management. New York: Oxford University Press.
Guest, D. (1999). Human resource management-the workers verdict. Human Resource Management Journal, 9 (3): 5-25.
Hays, S. & Kearney, R. (2001). Anticipated changes in human resource management. Public Administration Review, 61(5): 585-597.
Houston, D., & Cartwright, K. (2007). Spirituality and public service. Public Administration Review, 67(1): 88-102.
Kane, B., Crawford, J. & Grant, D. (1999). Barriers to effective HRM. International Journal of Manpower, 20(8): 494-515.
Kellough, J. & Selden, S. (2003). The reinvention of public personnel administration: an analysis of the diffusion of personnel management reforms in the States. Public Administration Review, 63(2): 165-176.
Noon, M. (1994). HRM: A map, model, or theory? In P Blyton and P Turnbull, reassessing human resource management. London: Sage.
Thompson, J. (2006). The federal civil service: the demise of an institution. Public Administration Review, 66(4): 496-503.
Truss, C. (2001). Complexities and controversies in linking HRM with organisational outcomes. Journal of Management Studies, 38(8): 1121-1149.
Wright, P. & McMahan, G. (1992). Theoretical perspectives for strategic management. Journal of Management, 18(2): 295-320.