All entries for Tuesday 18 August 2009

August 18, 2009

Human Resource Management Lesson 4 Exercise

For this exercise I would like to compare the employee involvement styles and procedures of two organizations that I was working for.

First one is the governmental organization - Tax Ministry of Russia. Actually I was working for one of the regional Inspections of the Tax Ministry as a Federal Inspector.

As the second example I would like to look at IBM.

Talking about the first example I would say that the style of management and employee involvement is similar to other governmental organizations. Using the Purcell's classification (Purcell, 1986) it is Traditional management style. Labor is viewed as a factor of production and employee subordination is assumed to be part of the ‘natural order’ of the employment relationship. Labor Unions exist, but they are very limited in their actions as this is a federal services organization. For example, any strikes are forbidden.

From the perspective of employee involvement I can classify it as a Task-oriented and Indirect. The involvement is mediated by the Union leaders so the involvement is indirect. The actions of the Unions are mostly targeted at the operations level and are related to the day-to-day activities.

The other example is the opposite.

Management style in IBM Russia/CIS I can classify as mix of sophisticated human relations and Consultative according to the Purcell's (Purcell, 1986) classification. The concrete style depends on the department and certain tasks of the teams. Nevertheless, employees are viewed as the company’s most valuable resource.

The involvement of the employees is direct. It is done through the many different tools like:

- Employee Surveys;

- Management Feedback systems;

- Regular department and "all-employees" meetings

Etc.

From the other dimension it is quite difficult to classify the involvement as it exists on both task- and power-centered levels.

Discussing the effectiveness of the employees' involvement systems described above I can say that there is no "True in an ultimate authority". At first sight it seems that the fist system (Tax Inspection) is not efficient. But thinking deeper you have to take into consideration the specifics of the job. It is federal services (the structure is close to military or police). There is a certain hierarchy that supports the order and effectiveness of the concrete tasks performance. There are number of the instructions and procedures and employees should strictly follow them.

In IBM we have a totally different situation. IBM is a private business that requires the creativity and broad thinking at the work. You can not just follow the instructions to be successful. So all this creative and innovative solutions that are invented by the employees should be properly communicated to the management to implement the best practices widely in the corporation.

From my point of view both systems are effective for each concrete case and environment.


August 2009

Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa Su
Jul |  Today  |
               1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31                  

Search this blog

Tags

Galleries

Most recent comments

  • Hi Alexander, I don't think you need too much further feedback from me. You need to add in the theor… by Kim White on this entry
  • Hi Alexander, You really need to apply Purcell and Storey to this and also to anchor it to motivatio… by Kim White on this entry
  • Hi Alexander, There is enough course material to indicate that the Learning Organisation is not a un… by Kim White on this entry
  • Alexander, This question really seeks an extension from your previous answer. I think the approach t… by Kim White on this entry
  • Alexander, You have made some sound points here. You have anchored this back to some of the material… by Kim White on this entry

Blog archive

Loading…
Not signed in
Sign in

Powered by BlogBuilder
© MMXIX