Upload
anonymous-uxd1yd
View
217
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/13/2019 Harvard Model
1/4
Harvard ModelIn 1985, Richard Walton published an article in the Harvard Business Review called From
Control to Commitment in the Workplace, which popularisedsoft HRM as a distinctive
approach to managing human resources. His argument was that effective HRM depends not on
strategies for controlling employees but on strategies for winning employees commitment.
The Harvard model proposes that many of the diverse personnel and labour relations
activities can be dealt with under four human resource (HR) categories: employee influence,
human resource flow, reward systems and work systems. These are general issues that managers
must attend to regardless of whether the organisation is unionised or not, whatever management
style is applied, and whether it is a growing or declining business.
Employee influenceEmployee influence is the question of how much responsibility, authority, and power is
voluntarily delegated by management and to whom. One of the critical questions here is, if
management share their influence, to what extent does this create compatibility (the word the
authors used is congruence) of interests between management and groups of employees? Theassumption the authors make is that any influence employees have should be compatible with
managements purpose and priorities.
Human resource flow
Human resource flow concerns managing the flow of people into, through, and out of the
organisation. This means making decisions on recruitment and selection, promotion, termination
of employment, and related issues of job security, career development, advancement, and fairtreatment. Managers and personnel specialists, according to the Harvard model, must work
together to ensure that the organisation has an appropriate flow of people to meet its strategic
requirements.
Reward systems
Reward systems regulate how employees are extrinsically and intrinsically rewarded for their
work. Extrinsic rewards are tangible pay and benefits: pay, overtime pay, bonuses, profit sharing,pensions, holiday entitlement, health insurance; and other benefits, such as flexible working
hours. Intrinsic rewards are intangible benefits and are said to strongly influence employees
motivation, job satisfaction, and organisational commitment. Intrinsic rewards are rewards fromthe work itself, such as sense of purpose, achievement, challenge, involvement, self-confidence,
self-esteem, and satisfaction. The Harvard model recommends that employees should be highly
involved in the design of an organisations reward systems but observes that final decisions,
besides meeting employees needs, must be consistent with the overall business strategy,management philosophy, and other HRM policies.
Work systems
Work systems are the ways in which people, information, activities, and technology arearranged, at all levels of the organisation, so that work can be performed efficiently and
effectively.
8/13/2019 Harvard Model
2/4
Policies in these four areas must be designed and applied in a coherent manner because, Beer and
his co-authors argue, HRM is considerably less likely to be effective where policies are
disjointed, made up of odd combinations of past practices, and are ad hoc responses to outsidepressures. The four policy areas must satisfy the many stakeholders of the enterprise for
example, shareholders, employees, customers, suppliers, communities, trade unions, trade
associations, and government. Employees are major stakeholders of the enterprise and it is theresponsibility of managers to establish systems that promote employee influence. Some peoplewould say that managers do not consider enough how to facilitate employee influence: indeed,
Beer et al. claim that, of the four issues discussed, employee influence is the central feature of an
HR system, as illustrated in the triangle in Figure 2.2.
A further recommendation of the Harvard model is that, when making HRM policy decisions,
managers should consider the four Cs: commitment, competence, congruence (compatibility),and cost-effectiveness. That is, managers should ask to what extent the policies they implement
will: enhance the commitment of people to their work and the organisations; attract, retain, and
develop people with the needed competence; sustain congruence (compatibility) betweenmanagement and employees; and be cost-effective in terms of wages, employee turnover, and
risk of employee dissatisfaction.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-DDXJIsRm7o0/UKeWwRYnJkI/AAAAAAAAAME/T97edh5lFIo/s1600/New+Picture.bmp8/13/2019 Harvard Model
3/4
The Harvard model is soft HRMbecause it concentrates attention on outcomes for people,
especially their well-being and organisational commitment. It does not rank businessperformance or one of the stakeholder interestsfor example, shareholdersas being inherently
superior to other legitimate interests, such as the community or unions. Organisational
effectiveness is represented in the Harvard model as a critical long-term consequence of HRoutcomes, but alongside the equally important consequences of individual and societal well-
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/--_laXdUrC-E/UKeXUCj2RUI/AAAAAAAAAMM/e2VWgAz0nys/s1600/New+Picture+(1).bmphttp://3.bp.blogspot.com/--_laXdUrC-E/UKeXUCj2RUI/AAAAAAAAAMM/e2VWgAz0nys/s1600/New+Picture+(1).bmp8/13/2019 Harvard Model
4/4
being. An organisation putting this model into practice would therefore aim to ensure that its
employees were involved in their work and were able to participate in decision making. HRM
policies would be developed and implemented to meet employees needs for influence, butwithin the limitation of having to be consistent with the overall business strategy and
management philosophy.