Stoik Musah,
LBS,East Midland,
United Kingdom.
25 July 2006.
TABLE OF CONTENT
Section one. Page No
1.1 Executive Summary 1
1.2 Introduction and Terms of Reference 1
Section Two.
2.1 People Management 2
2.2 Strategic Human Resource Management 3
Section Three.
3.1 Centralizing People Management in an Organization 4
3.2 Debates on Strategic Human Resource Management. 5
Section Four
4.1 Conclusion. 7
4.2 Recommendation. 8
4.3 References 9
SECTION ONE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The subject of this report is to provide insight on Strategic Human Resource Management application to people management practice for Ampersand Clothing Company. The Management intends to centralize the operations of the personnel department in the two companies (Ampersand and Ampersand Plus Clothing Company).The report discuss in depth, Strategic Human Resource Management and People Management practice in organizational development. It introduced possible strategies to affect the centralization process strategic intent, with line managers saddled with the responsibility of enforcing these strategic policies on the operational level. Possible areas of conflict was identified in the process, with suggestive management tools to proffer solution to these conflicts. In understanding the ways these conflicts emerge, discussions on the latest debates on Strategic Human Resource Management (SHRM) was introduced. It is believed that, a comprehensive understanding of the idea behind each criticism and debate will help inform better judgment on the subject.
INTRODUCTION:
This report centers on the strategic change management process for centralizing the operation of Ampersand Clothing Company and Ampersand Plus. It explores the transformation process of People Management techniques and Strategic Human Resource Management policies required for this process. For this reason, after understanding what is it about people, that translate into value for the organization of which they are part with. Strategic Human Resource Management help to build the operating environment and organizational structure, to facilitate a best fit for the desired configuration process, to bring about the desired organization structure, required for Ampersand Clothing Company, to achieve this strategic organizational and people management objective.
The first section of this report discussed people management and strategic human resource management .The subsequent section provides insight on how the two companies: Ampersand Clothing Company and Ampersand Plus, can centralize their operation to operate as one organization .In the same way, to understand the complexity involve in this process, the report introduce and analyzed the conflicting views of reknown proponents of the strategic human resource management debate. In the end, recommendations on the best possible cause of action to go about the change management process was highlighted to serve as guide for individuals acting as change agent, for this organization reengineering process.
SECTION TWO
PEOPLE MANAGEMENT:
People management involves the range of methods and approaches used by employers in resourcing their organization in such a way that they can meet their key goals .This comprises of a set of management activities that facilitates the achievement of four fundamental groups of personnel and development objectives , which are : staffing, performance, administration and change management(Taylor 2005).Staffing objectives involves making certain that an organization is able to call on the services of enough numbers of staff to meet its set objectives. These staffs may be employed in a variety of different roles but one way or the other they must be able to carry out the task and duties needed for the organization to function effectively. Performance objective begins where the staffing objectives have being achieved .The purpose of performance objective is to effect all the range of methods used by employers to motivate the staffs and make them willing to perform to the best of their abilities .While administration process on its part is concerned with managing employment relationships which has being established with these staffs in accordance with the law and professional ethics. In order to achieve these aims, it is necessary for the management of Ampersand to write out personnel and development policies, accepted work procedures and other documents relating to employment of individuals like job description, offer letters, contracts, weekly expected work hours, targets and disciplinary warnings for staffs, which will serve as guideline to their work operation. The change management aspect of people management ensures that proper recognition is given to the importance of change in the organization and its management process. Basically organization management has its arguments embedded in the organizations business environment that is subject to continual change .Take for example, when two companies’s come together during merger and acquisition. In the integration stage, some certain parts of the organization structure is more open to environmental influences, and they in turn react sharply to it (Lawrence and Lorsch,1967 cited in John Walton,1999:495).This phenomenon to the organization sometimes, can be devastating. Therefore there is need to align these managerial practices and organization structures with environmental demands so that the desired work behaviors arise(Schuber and Jackson 1987).Alternatively effective people management practice by the management of Ampersand can function as an important change agent to redress this situation when the need arise(Taylor 2005).
STRATEGIC HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT:
Strategic Human Resource Management cannot be discussed comprehensively without understanding the concept of Human Resource Management studies. This is because both SHRM and HRM do have areas of convergence in their operation. In other words, Human Resource Management concerns the human side of the enterprises and the factors that determine workers relationships with their employers, it covers, among other factors: management and workers communication, element of work psychology, employee relations, training and motivation, alongside conditions of work (Hannagan,1995:294).Similarly Strategic Human Resource Management is said to be the sum part of Human Resource Management with in depth insight of the organizations direction, a study on its environmental analysis, and organizational strategy formulation , together with this organizational strategy implementation and evaluation(Bratton and Gold 1999).It is also said to be the craft knowledge of the changing nature of work, to develop new human resource policies, to involve employees at all levels in the change process, to determine the most effective work process, and to build teams with the capacity to learn and become self managed. Strategic Human Resource Management also help managers to learn how to read and analyze their organization by: understanding and explaining the organizations problems retrospectively, restructuring an organization or part of it, identifying existing and preferred behaviours in the organization in order to improve work process and relationships(Jim Grieves 2003).Understanding how an organization Human Resource Strategy links with these different aspect of the organization will help to present a strategic map intended to guide all managers and change agents in their relationship with employees(Manson 2006).In the case of Ampersand Clothing Company and Ampersand Plus , the SHRM policies should be related to the internal operations of both company’s , from the composition of its activities in terms of product line in the shop floor and service undertaken, to the technologies on which these activities are based , and the shared behaviour/culture of the people in each organization, alongside the manner in which the organization is structured and controlled. This is important, since the central objective of the strategic human resources intent is to centralize the operations of both companies. To affect this objective the strategic planning should be jointly developed by the head of the central authority and business unit managers. Planning is centralized with the central authority or Head Office having the final say. The Head office further arrange and direct the HRM strategy development by setting and coordinating organization wide priorities- here people management has already being spelt out as both companies set objective to reposition the organization .This should be followed by a corporate vision of long-term perspective which requires central coordination and control. This vision should be realistic, feasible, simple and clear in the strategic human resource management objective. And then efforts are made centrally to create cross business synergies.
SECTION THREE
ADOPTION OF SHRM AS SOLUTION FOR CENTRALIZING PEOPLE MANAGEMENT PROBLEMS IN AN ORGANIZATION.
Here, Ampersand clothing company should move from an organization based on autonomous business units to an organization based on centralized coordination aimed to capture efficiencies and combine resources in innovative ways. One resolution of this structural shift is to substitute diverse processes in functional areas such as Human Resources with policy umbrella which permits bringing under the control of a central authority (Andrew Mayo 1995).The task of the Strategic Human Resource Management unit in the central unit is to determine the frame work of the best practice of work routine , which will enable linkage with the structural process, system, and strategic issues, and also to provide consultant help built around this items from the top.
This entails focusing initially on top officials like the weekly Monday morning meetings held with the management team by the Managing Director. This top officials who then operate as coaches and guide for their subordinates, who in turn were responsible for facilitating the Strategic Human Resource Management Policies among those who report directly to them (Burack 1991).As these Strategic Human Resource Management policies are being delegated down the organizational social hierarchy, at the operational level sometimes, these policies are met with constraints which sometimes disrupts its original intent. In the process consensus will be created among key managers .In a centralized organization the balancing process of this constraints can be institutionalized through the restructuring of relationship between the people at the top and those below. This can be done using a wide variety of management tools, which must be applied from the top, and down the line management, to manage the unit heads and the roots of the conflicts. In the same vain ,for each decision these conflicting sets of tools have to be traded off against the other, depending on the decision ,while overtime, from decision to decision an overall balance has to be maintained as the process continue(Dos and Prahalad 1984).For example if the conflict is considered necessary to deal simply with organizational roles, procedures and operational process, then the management tools to be applied for this particular situations will be to specify, and then slice up into roles, definitions for persons and groups in the organization. And if on the other hand it is considered that the problem is more fundamentally behavioural in origin e.g motivation, team, relationships, leadership issues, stress related work roles. Then the management tools should be geared towards dealing with emotional behavioural issues, and this requires appropriate social – psychological expertise (Jim Grieves 2003).
A successful centralized authority blends an array of these tools into a consistent management process. A company who fails in the appropriate application of these tools consistently will face difficulties in effecting coordination of its organizational resources, process and values. Jim Grieves (2002) makes it clear that it is very much important that Strategic Human Resource Development views the organization from a pluralistic perspective which sees agreement between the various sub cultures and units as a state of permanent negotiation .It is this internal development within organizational development that has given direction to the debates in the study of Strategic Human Resource Management to recognized the importance of proactive change in the organization.
DEBATES ON STARTEGIC HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT;
Strategic Human Resource Development perspective is informed by four debates on issues relating to organizational development .First is the argument that internal changes to an organization should be considered in relation to key contingencies and possible future event and from technology in particular. This is the views of those authors in support of the contingencies theory thesis (Burns and Stalker, 1961cited in Jim Grieves 2003:93).The second conflicting view of reason is that change results from the internal movement of forces in more than one organizations in which different interest groups seeks changes that maximizes their own interest, and resist changes that minimizes their interests. This is the labour process approach .The third thesis, is the argument that change is driven by well informed consumers whose insatiable appetites have force organizations to replace mass-produced goods and services with segmented market products. This the flexible specialization thesis .While the fourth view is represented by the fact that organizations are managed by key players – which are called managers , who make decisions .These decisions appears to be rational in reality, and its very convincing and fair, but is itself circumscribed by political boundaries(Woodward,1965 cited in Jim Grieves 2003:98).
The contingency approach emphasize technology as the most important variable in any organization .Here the organization structure was seen to be determined by the requirements of technology, as it applies to its resources, which are define as tangible assets: people, money and also intangible assets: relationships, brand name e.t.c .In this context decision about resources includes staffing and retention issues (Bower2001). This is to say, the staffing and retention issues, in the integrating organization should aim at retaining the local managers at the newly acquired company (Ampersand Plus) since they are knowledgeable in the local operational issues of the firm even before the acquisition. This is ideal for the acquiring company to enable the central authority keep tab with event in this company’s operating unit at the local level. Also in the area of retention , a key factor by the Malaysian company in obtaining successful people management structure in place at Ampersand will be instituting effective mechanism of a resourced based SHRM practice to facilitate the transfer of knowledge individuals from the acquiring firm to the newly acquired firm(Jackson 2001).Here a slow assimilation process should be encourage in the integration process over time .This will go a long way to redress Ampersands difficulty in recruiting and retraining quality employees to replace the skilled machine operators retired.#
Further more the change management process emphasis on technology should be reflected in every area of the organization work operation. In other word, a re-engineering of every area of its operation will be a better alternative, from accounting and stock control unit, ordering and distribution unit to clerical services and personnel. The personnel department should move from its traditional function to getting more involved in the implementation of SHRM practices that involves organizational development. Effort from the part of the central authority would be to link the personnel department functions with the organization business strategy. This approach is also known as the Best fit school of SHRM practice. The personnel department should aim at building employee behaviour in line with the firm’s strategic objective. Broader functions as employment security, work teams, performance appraisal, incentive compensation, employee ownership, competitive strategy, and advice on organization structures, should be embedded in the personnel department work routine. In this context Bower (2001) in his work argued that for two firms to integrate successfully, they need to align their HRM strategy with their integration strategy. He stressed that it will be of great importance for the organization to have a clear understanding of the integration strategy to be able to specify the role SHRM should play.
By contrast, the labour process approach challenges the assumptions that technology determines change. Rather, organizational change was seen to result from the attempt to control the labour process. As a result management control systems emerge as direct result of management intervention in the inevitable contest between the interest of capital on one hand, and labour on the other. In this way, whereas technology was the main determinant for the contingencies debate authors as John Woodward and other researchers from the labour process perspective saw the key determinants as control of the workforce with technology viewed as a mechanism in this process. In the works of Jim Grieves (2000), he stress in support of this claim that, when new technology is used, it is used as a strategic weapon in the struggle to maximize profit, principally through the deskilling of the job content and secondly by the attempt to remove control over the execution of task by workers themselves.
While the flexible specialization thesis has its debate, viewing change as a result of transformations in markets and products .Here the use of technology was seen as enhancing design and work process. As Mcloughlin and Clark(1994) argued ,that the approach viewed technological innovation as an attempt to separate the unintended consequences of mass consumer goods, by replacing them with relatively low volume, efficient process , and segmented markets. Perhaps the central core of Mcloughlin and Clark’s position was the attempt to resolve the unfavorable politics of the work place that had emerged as a result of the era of mass production of goods, when organizations were only concern with increasing production unit output.
The assumptions of the strategic choice perspective differs from the other three perspectives, this is because of its choice of methods used in selective fields of the organization. This approach was name by John Child (1972) who according to Mcloughlin and Clark, introduced the concept of “strategic choice” as a means of emphasizing the role of managerial choice rather than technology in shaping work process and organization (Mcloughlin and Clark 1994).Child suggest that the major focus should be with the process of decision making in an organization .He draws attention to the question of – who makes the decision in an organization and why these decisions are made. Strategic choices suggests that an organizations strategic choices are made in three general areas, which are (a) the domain, e.g country of origin, alongside the limitations and the constraints facing the organization (Potter1990).(b)its structures and systems e.g. this refers to choices of how centralized and standardized an organizations activities will be.(c)performance standards, which partly determines the extent of flexibility an organization has within its economic environment.
An organizations country of origin tends to influence its organizations structure and development. Take for example when two firms of the same country of origin, come together. The Human resource management strategic fit will be far different in the integration process, than when the two merging firm belongs to two different country group (Aguilera and Denker 2004).Thus we hear distinction in organizational operational practice between Liberal Market Economies like Britain,Canada,USA,Australia and Coordinated Market Economy like Germany ,France , Switzerland and Japan , where integral re-engineering process of the organization has to take into consideration the influence of environmental contingencies from these economies . For example issues like shareholders capitalism culture, national models, customers and financial institutions, are part of the context, judgment on strategic issues will be made .Thus the market for corporate governance is such that the network of relationships among stake holders will restrict centralization in a number of ways. A recent example highlighting this differences in corporate governance of the aforementioned illustration of two company’s of different country of origin is the successful take over bid of Mannesmann(German) and Vodafone (English) in 1999.Vodafone had to deal with entirely different ownership structure influence by banks , opaque accounting and disclosure rules, different company’s laws ,German corporate culture with strong orientation towards production and engineering (Hopner and Jackson 2001).However in the case of Ampersand clothing company ,there were no such issues ,stating in precise terms, the country of origin of the newly acquired company Ampersand plus to discern if the same principle apply .
Furthermore organization structures and decision making systems maybe participative or authoritarian .This system determine the nature of strategic choice decisions in an organization .In the views of Child(1972),he emphasized his position on this subject that decision making is a political process whereby strategic choices on issues such as long-term organizational objective , the allocation of the resources and organization design are normally initiated by a “a power holding group” or “dominant coalition “ within the organization .These are a group of individuals whose interest forge the direction of an organization strategic decisions.
On the other hand, performance standards on its part relate the organization within its economic environment.It partly helps to determine the extent of flexibility the organization has within its economic environment For example, performance standard based on innovativeness will lead to organization decision relating to technological literature and research and development, while performance standard based on market share will lead to organization strategic decision relating to competitor monitoring. Similarly, an organization performance standard based on reducing costs will lead to the development of cost control systems. A better approach in understanding how strategic human resource management can add value to business performance with concentration on what constitute organization performance was introduce in the US best practice model of HRM; where the application of professional human resource techniques –if when implemented by an organization will have the potential to improve employee attitude and behaviour to work (Holden etal 2004).
Taken together, these three strategic choices constitute an organizations strategic configuration and once a particular configuration has been chosen, it will be very difficult to transform it, under this circumstances the organization tend to experience extended periods of equilibrium. Therefore a change in any of the subcomponent within the configuration will lead to the need to effect transformation of the entire configuration. It is advisable that the application of strategic human resource management should not be zero down to one approach alone. But a combined application of different model approach at every stage of Ampersands people management centralization process life cycle
SECTION FOUR
CONCLUSION.
In this report, we highlighted in depth, the understanding of the concept of SHRM, HRM and the different variables embedded in the operations of people management practice in an organizational context. Basically the central objective of this report is to highlight possibility of how both organization (Ampersand Clothing Company and Ampersand Plus) can operate as a central organization .This was discussed in details by highlighting the need to effect a top down approach of the strategic human resource management practice in the organization structural hierarchy, with line managers saddled with the responsibility of enforcing this strategic policies at the operational level. As this SHRM policies is delegated down the organization structure ,the report highlighted possible causes of conflicts in the process , and suggestions was made on the effective management tools required as solution for each possible emergent conflict. In understanding the forms these conflicts sometimes identify with, the report introduce the various debates and criticisms by scholars and researchers in the field of organization development. Individually, stating clearly, convincing assumptions based on real issues, on why they strongly belief in their position. An understanding of these different views is required by any organization change agent if the individual intends to view SHRM and organizational development from a pluralistic perspective. This will help to facilitate better judgement on strategic choices and decision.
RECOMMENDATION
The management of Ampersands Clothing Company should be aware that the coordination and integration of an expanding organization requires greater central control of its SHRM, if its determine to achieve its set objective of integrating the people management of both companys.This is because a centralized SHRM is advantageous since it can plan its own activities independently by coordinating work process and maintaining a communion of shared ideas, thereby achieving more synergy and a identity as a group. This can be done by defining broader roles to the personnel unit as succession planning and strategic staffing among staff and in relation to organization positions, since the bulk of the work for this strategic process will rest in the desk of the personnel units and the line managers. The managers at all level should be aware of the benefits - centralizing people management can provide for the organization and the techniques that are applied for this process. It is generally recommended that these processes should begin small at the onset. An initial seed project is useful for trying out the methods and demonstrating the benefits in the early stages .This is because the organization changes may take some experimenting and modifying, before a comfortable structure is found; for you can’t expect everything to run smoothly from the beginning. Starting small lets people practice and get used to the idea slowly. This is preferable to a diverse intervention that tries to uproot the existing process and organization. Such a disruptive approach will likely alienate employers and managers. By beginning slowly and making changes in small increments event will unfold to result in an efficient development process and organizational structure.
REFERENCES.
Abraham.M. et al (1999) Key Factors In Predicting Effectiveness of Cultural Change and Improve Productivity In Implementing Total Quality Management. International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, vol16, 112-132.
Aguilera and Denker (2004) HRM In Cross border Mergers and Acquisitions. Internal Journal of HRM .8 December 2004. .Routledge Publishers.
Bird .A. and Beechler.S (1994) Links Between Business Strategy and Human Resource Management Strategy in US-Based Japanese Subsidiaries: An empirical Investigation. Being Paper Presented at the 1992 Association of Japanese Business Studies Meeting.
Burns .T.and Stalker.G (1961)”The Management of Innovation “Cited in Jim Grieves (2003) Strategic Human Resource Development. Sage Publication. Britain.
Bratton and Gold.J(1999)”Human Resource Management Theory and Practice “ Cited in Jane Mason (2006) Models and Critiques of HRM. Issues in Human Resource Management Module Handout. GCIB Programme. Leicester Business School. Leicester.
Burack.E.H (1973) Changing the Company Culture –the Role OF Human Resource Development. Long Range Planning.24 (1), pp88-95.
Bryson .J. (1998) HRM Challenges In a Bank Merger-Observation from a Case Study of Westpac Bank and Trust Bank of New Zealand. Victoria University of Wellington Publication. New Zealand.
Bower.J.L (2001) Not all Merger and Acquisition are Alike and That Matters. Harvard Business Review.
Bailey.T. (1993) Discretionary Effort and The Organization of Work: Employee Participation and Work Reform. Working Paper, Columbia University.
Bower .J. and Doz .Y. (1979) “Strategy Formulation; A Social and Political Process”. In: Dan Schendel and Charles Hofer (2000) Strategic Management; A New View of Business Policy and Planning. Boston, Little brown.
Child .J. (1972) Organizational Structure, Environment and Performance; The Role of Strategic Choice. In: Jim Grieves (2003) Strategic Human Resource Development .Sage Publication. London.
Chakravarthy B.S. (1987) On tailoring a Strategic Planning System To its Context; Some Empirical Evidence. A Strategic Management Journal.
Delaney .J. and Huselid.M. (1996) Impact of Human Resource Management Practices on Perceptions of Organisational Performance. An Academy of Management Journal 1996 Vol 39.
REFERENCES
Grieves. J. (2006) Strategic Human Resource Development. Sage Publication .London.
Gratton .L. and Ghoshal. S. (2003) Managing Personnel Human Capital: New Ethos For The Volunteer Employee. A European Management Journal Vol 21 No 1, pp1-7, 2003.
Greiner.L. (1980) “Organizational Development Values and Bottom Line” In: Burke.W. And Goodstein.L. (eds) Trend and Issues in Organization Development: Current Theory and Practice. University Associate Publishers, San Diego, CA.
Hamel .G. and Prahalad.C. (1994) Competing For The Future. Boston,
MA, Harvard Business School Publication.
Hopner .M. and Jackson .G. (2001) Political Economy of Takeovers In Germany: The Case of Mannesmann and its Implication for Institutional Change. A working Paper of Max Planck Institute For The Study of Societies, Cologne.
Huselid.M. etal (1987) Technical and Strategic Human Resource Management Effectiveness as Determinants of a Firms Performances. An Academy of Management Journal.
Holden .L. etal (2004) Human Resource Management: A Contemporary Approach, Fourth Edition, Pearson Education Publishers. London.
Hannagan .T. (1995) “Management Concepts and Practice” In: Jane Mason (2006) HRM Models and Critiques. Issues in Human Resource Management Module Handout .GCIB Programme.Leicester Business School. Leicester.
Kelliher.C. and Perrett.G. (2001) Business Strategy and Approaches to Human Resource Management – A Case Study of New Developments in the United Kingdom Restaurant Industry. A Personnel Review Journal, Vol30, No4, 2001.
Lawrence and Lorsch (1967) Organization and Environment .Boston MA: Harvard Business School Publication.
Lembke.S and Wilson.M (1998) Putting The Team Into Team Work: Alternative Theoretical Contribution For Contemporary Management Practice. Human Relation Journal Vol51, No7, 1998.
Mason.J. (2006) Human Resource Management Models and Critiques of HRM.
Issues in International Human Resource Management Module Handout. Session 4. GCIB Programme. Leicester Business School. Leicester.
Marchington .M. and Wilkinson.A. (2003) People Management and Development: Human Resource Management at Work. 2nd Edition .Cromwell Press. London.
REFERENCES
Mcloughlin.I.and Clark.J. (1994) Technology Change at Work .Milton Keynes, Open University Press.
Mintzberg.H. (1973)”The Nature of Managerial Work” In: John Walton (1999) Strategic Human Resource Management .Pearson Education Publishers. Great Britain.
Mayo.A (1995) The Pain and Gain of Devolution and Empowerment: Organization and People.Pitman.pp14-18
Potter.C (1990) What is Culture: And Can It Be Useful For Organization Change Agents? Leadership and Organization Development Journal.pp17-24.
Potosnak.K. (2000) Human Factors, Tools, Techniques and Concept to Optimize User Interface. A Human Factor Magazine. Aston Tale. California.
Prahalad and Yves Doz (1984) Pattern of Strategic Control Within Multinational Corporation. A Journal of International Business Studies, Pg55.
Rayner .C. and AdamSmith.D (2005) Managing and Leading People. CIPD Publication, London.
Rees.D. and Mcbain .D (2004) People Management: Challenges and Opportunities.Palgrave Macmillian.New York.
Sebastianelli .R. and Tamimi.N (2003) Understanding The Obstacles Of Total Quality Management Success. University of Scranton.
Snell.S. (1992) Control Theory In Strategic Human Resource Management: The Mediating Effect of Administrative Information. An Academy Of Management Journal.
Taylor.S. (2005) People Resourcing, 3rd Edition.CIPD Publication,2005.
Walton .J (1999) Strategic Human Resource Development .Pearson Publishers. London.
Woodward.J (1965)”Industrial Organization; Theory and Practice, Oxford University Press.” In: Jim Grieves (2003) Strategic Human Resource Development. Sage Publication. Britain.
Stoik Musah writes from LBS,EastMidland,United Kingdom. Email: stoik_joy@yahoo.com
Wednesday 14 February 2007
Thursday 8 February 2007
The Contribution of the Resource Based View of Strategic Human Resource Management on Organisational Performance.
by
Kehinde Songonuga,
LBS,East Midland.
United Kingdom.
The resource-based view to strategic human resource management (SHRM) focuses on the costly to copy attributes of the firm as the fundamental drivers of performance and competitive advantage (Cooner 1991). Linking to the understanding of the resource based view of the firm; Barney (1991) described competitive advantage as “when a firm is implementing a value creating strategy not simultaneously being implemented by any current or potential competitors”. The task is to maintain this competitive advantage in such a way that competitors’ efforts to replicate that advantage are frustrated and eventually cease. The resource-based view focuses on the promotion of sustained competitive advantage through the development of the human capital rather than merely aligning human resources to current strategic goals (Torrington et al 2002). This essay will show various ways on how the resource-based view of SHRM in organisations can contribute to enhanced organisational performance.
Human resources can provide competitive advantage for the business, as long as they are unique and can not be copied or substituted for by competing organisations, competitive success not coming from simply making choices in the present, but from building up distinctive capabilities over significant periods of time (Boxall 1996). Torrington et al (2002) argue that the focus is not just on the behaviour of the human resources, but on the skills, knowledge, attitudes and competencies which underpin this, and which have a more sustained impact on long-term survival than current behaviour. The central theme emerging in the SHRM resource-based literature is that privately held knowledge is a basic source of advantage in competition. The resource-based view generally addresses performance difference between firms using asymmetries in knowledge. A resource based theory of a firm thus entails a knowledge-based perspective; it blends concepts from organisational economics and strategic management (Barney 1991). According to this perspective, a firm’s ability to attain and keep profitable market positions depends on its ability to gain and defend advantageous positions in underlying resources important to production and distribution (Cooner 1991). Though the field of SHRM was not directly born of the resource-based view (RBV), it has clearly been instrumental to its development (Wright et al 2001). This was largely because of the RBV shifting emphasis in the strategy literature away from external factors towards internal firm resources as sources of competitive advantage (Wright et al 2001). The RBV view of competitive advantage differs from the traditional strategy paradigm in that its emphasis is on the link between strategy and the internal resources of the firm, and it is firm-focused, whereas the traditional strategic analysis concept has had an industry-environment focus (Schuler and Jackson 1999). Boxall (1996) argues that resources are not simply understood as assets in the formal accounting sense, but include any feature of the firm with value creating properties. This means that aspects of the business that are not formally owned by it, such as the talents and interactions of the people who work in it, are not ignored but come within the area of systematic interest. This justifies Barney (1991) argument that business excellence is not just about best- practice but about the intellectual capital and business intelligence to anticipate the future.
From the resource based view, in order for an organisation’s resources to contribute to enhanced organisational performance and maintain sustained competitive advantage, four criteria must be attributable to the resources: the resource must add positive value to the firm, the resource must be unique or rare among current and potential competitors, the resource must be inimitable and the organisation needs to ensure they are organised, this is also known as the VRIO framework (Golding 2004). Therefore, given resource heterogeneity, resource immobility and satisfaction of the requirements of value, rareness, inimitability, and organisation, an organisation’s resources can be a source of sustained competitive advantage (Schuler and Jackson 1999). Barney (1991) states that RBV makes it clear that firms can not expect to buy or purchase sustained competitive advantages, in that the advantages, if they exist, can only be found in the rare, inimitable, and non-substitutable resources already present in the organisation. Firstly, in order for human resources to exist as a sustained competitive advantage, they must provide value to the firm. Firms create value through either decreasing product/service costs or differentiating the product/service in a way that allows the firm to charge a premium price. Thus the ultimate goal of any HR executive is to create value through the HR function, but the first question that an HR executive must address is “How can the HR function aid either decreasing cost or increasing revenue?” (Barney and Wright 1998). Value to customers is an essential element of competitive advantage; therefore, for a resource to be a potential source of competitive advantage, it must be valuable or enable the creation of value (Fahy 1999). The HR function must be capable of making a difference in the organisation in the sense that it adds value in some way (Marchington and Wilkinson 2002). This is where the demand for labour is heterogeneous, and where supply for labour is heterogeneous-in other words where different firms require different competencies from each other and for different roles in the organisation, and where the supply of potential labour comprises individuals with different competencies (Torrington et al 2002). The suggestion of the RBV is that if HR wishes to be a “strategic partner”, they need to know which human resources contribute the most value that leads to sustainable competitive advantage in the business, as some human resources may provide greater influence for competitive advantage than others (Golding 2004). On this basis value is created by matching individual’s competencies with the requirements of the organisation and/or the job. Barney (1991) points that a resource must permit the firm to conceive of or implement strategies that improve its efficiency and effectiveness by meeting the needs of customers. This implies that though resources may meet other conditions, if they do not enable the creation of value, they are not a prospective source of advantage. The value of resources in an organisation is not enough to create sustainable competitive advantage, because if any other organisations hold the same value, then it will only provide competitive parity (Golding 2004). Therefore an organisation needs to consider the next level of the framework: rarity.
Rarity means there must be a shortage of these particular resources in the market to the extent that there are insufficient to go round all organisations (Marchington and Wilkinson 2002). The HR executive needs to consider how to develop rare characteristics of an organisation’s human resources to gain competitive advantage (Golding 2004). In some circumstances, the first organisation in an industry to implement an HR strategy can obtain competitive advantage over other firms (Barney 1991). If the HR strategy has value but no form of rarity, other organisations may develop an identical strategy or even something more unique, thereby displacing the first mover of sustained competitive advantage. A firm enjoys sustained competitive advantage when it is implementing a value-created strategy not simultaneously implemented by large numbers of other firms. If a particular valuable organisational resource is possessed by large numbers of firms, then each of these firms have the capacity of exploiting that resource in the same way, thereby implementing a common strategy that gives no one firm a competitive advantage (Barney 1991). Torrington et al (2002) argues that due to the normal distribution of ability, human resources with high ability levels are, by definition, rare. The goal of virtually all selection programs is to ensure that the organisation is hiring only the highest ability individuals. The issues then, are the validity of the selection system and whether or not the organisation is able to attract and retain those applicants considered to be of the highest quality (Torrington et al 2002). To observe that sustainable competitive advantage only accrue to firms that have valuable and rare resources is not to dismiss common organisational resources as unimportant. Instead, these valuable but common resources can help ensure a firm’s survival when they are exploited to create parity in an industry (Barney 1991). How rare a valuable firm resource must be in order to have the potential for generating competitive advantage is a difficult question. It is not difficult to see that if a firm’s valuable resources are absolutely unique among a set of competing firms, those resources will generate competitive advantage and have potential for creating sustainable competitive advantage (Barney 1991). Valuable and rare resources can create above normal profits for the firm in the short term; however, if other firms can imitate these qualities, then over time the characteristics will provide no more than competitive parity (Barney and Wright 1998).
In order for a resource to be considered a sustained competitive advantage and enhance organisation performance, human resources must be inimitable. The inability of competitors to duplicate resource endowments is a central element of the resource based view (Fahy 1999). Also competitors will not be able to duplicate the exact resource in question, as they will be unable to copy the unique historical conditions of the first firm. Wright et al (1992) use the concepts of unique historical conditions, casual ambiguity and social complexity to demonstrate the inimitability of competitive advantage stemming from human resources. Wright et al (1992) noted that this history is important as it will affect the behaviour of the human resource pool via the development of unique norms and culture. thus even if a competing firm recruited a group of individuals from a competitor they would still not be able to produce the same outcome in the new firm as the context is different. Causal ambiguity describes a situation where the causal source of competitive advantage is not easily identified and social complexity recognises that in many situations competitive advantage stems from unique social relationships that cannot be duplicated (Mahoney and Pandian 1992). Another reason that a firm’s resources may be inimitable is that they may be very complex social phenomena, beyond the ability of firms to systematically manage and influence (Peteraf 1993). When competitive advantages are based in such complex social phenomena, the ability of other firms to imitate these resources is significantly constrained. Lastly, to ensure the HR function can provide sustainable competitive advantage, the organisation has to be organised so that they can develop valuable resources that are rare and inimitable (Golding 2004). The organisation requires having in place the systems and practices that allow human resource characteristics to bear the fruit of their potential advantages. The question of organisation focuses attention on systems, as opposed to single HR practices (Barney and Wright 1998). This means a focus on horizontal integration of HR practices, rather than viewing each in isolation and the organisation ensuring that their policies and practices in the HR functional areas are coordinated and coherent, and not contradictory (Golding 2004).it is therefore clear that the employment of highly qualified and talented people can be useless without effective processes to ensure that they work well in combination and wish to contribute to organisational goals (Lado and Wilson 1994). According to the VRIO framework aspects of human resources that are valuable, rare, inimitable and appropriate HR systems in place could bring about sustainable competitive advantage.
Although RBV is of great use in helping to understand why differences exist between firms and consequently how certain organisations may be able to gain competitive advantage, it has notable potential limitations. Firstly it neglects the forces that lead to similarities in the same industry (Marchington and Wilkinson 2002). Barney and Zajac (1994) argue that RBV is tautological and does not generate testable hypotheses, recognising that most research applying the RBV has failed to test its fundamental concepts. Critics also point out that RBV focuses strongly on the internal context of the business. Some writers have suggested that the effectiveness of the resource-based view approach is inextricably linked to the external context of the firm (Golding 2004). There have been recognitions that the RBV approach provides more added value when the external environment is less predictable (Golding 2004). Priem and Butler (2001) argue that the static argument behind RBV is descriptive: it identifies generic characteristics of rent-generating resources without much attention to differing situations or resources comparisons. How the organisational resources generate sustainable rent is still not known other than through their heterogeneity. Although applications of RBV has taken variety of forms, ranging from high performance work systems and stocks of talent, to fit between employee skills and strategy it has employed a common underlying logic: human resource activities are thought to lead to the development of a skilled workforce and one that engages in functional behaviour for the firm, thus forming a source of competitive advantage (Wright et al 2001). Becker and Huselid (1998) note that this results in higher performance, which translates into increased profitability for the organisation. While this theoretical story is appealing, Wright et al (2001) notes that it is important to note that most of the empirical studies assess only two variables: HR practices and performance. While establishing such a relationship provides empirical evidence for the potential value of HR to firms, it fails to adequately test the RBV in two important ways (Wright et al 2001). First, no attempt has yet been made to empirically assess the validity of the proposition that SHRM practices are casually ambiguous, nor whether they are actually difficult to imitate. Boxall and Steeneveld (1999) argue that while instinctively obvious and possibly supported by subjective data, the field lacks verifiable quantitative data to support these declarations. That virtually anything associated with the organisation can be a resource suggest that prescriptions of dealing in certain ways with certain categories of resources might be operationally valid, whereas other categories of resources might be inherently difficult to measure and manipulate, one example of a resource that might be difficult to measure is tacit knowledge (Lado and Wilson 1994). Some have argued for tacit knowledge-that understanding gained from experience but that cannot be expressed to another person and is unknown to oneself-as a source of competitive advantage (Lado and Wilson 1994). Lado and Wilson (1994) argue that this may be descriptively correct, but it is likely to be quite difficult for practitioners to effectively manipulate that which is inherently unknowable. Mabey et al (1998) argues that in various researches carried out, there has been no strong statistical correlation between HR programmes supported by senior management and company performance. Other authors have anticipated this evidence as confirmation that managerial policies have no significant impact on an organisation’s economic performance (Mabey et al 1998). Priem and Butler (2001) also noted that in RBV studies, researchers sometimes take a frequently research strategy subject area, relabel the independent variables as “resource” and the dependent variables as “competitive advantage” and use measures common to much cross-sectional strategy research as operationalization. Together, these issues suggest that the current high level of abstraction found in the static approach to the RBV might be one thing that could limit its usefulness for strategy (Priem and Butler 2001).
In a response to criticism from the resource-based theorists, Porter(1991) argues that resources are not valuable in and of themselves, but because they allow organisations to perform activities that create advantages in particular markets, add that it seems safe to suggest, however, that what the resource-based view has stimulated is a re-balancing of the literature on strategy in a way that stresses the strategic significance of internal resources and capabilities and their historical development. Boxall (1996) argues that those organisations which combine high levels of competence in multiple modes of strategy making appear to be the highest performers, and not only those organisations with astute leadership at the top but those that can combine this strength with deep employee involvement in strategic decision-making appear to be more effective. In this way the resource based view suggest an integration of theory on strategy process and strategic content. (Boxall 1996). RBV can provide a strong base for strategic HRM. The aim of RBV is to improve resource capacity-achieving strategic fit between resources and opportunities and also obtaining added value from the effective deployment of resources (Peteraf 1993). The RBV theory provides a rationale for strategic HRM and in line with intellectual capital theory, RB theory emphasises that investment in people add to their value to the firm (Armstong and Baron 2002).
The resource-based approach provides a framework for examining the pool of human resources that may be either able or unable to carry out a given strategy during the formulation phase of SHRM. Thus the resource-based view may demonstrate the fact that strategies are not universally implementable, but are contingent on having the human resource base necessary to implement them. RBV focuses on the analysis of internal strengths and weaknesses, paying particular attention to the ways in which firms can develop valuable resources and erect barriers to imitation of them. It is however, without conceptual weaknesses. Strategy analysts should remember that the firm exist in environments: resources are not ends in themselves but are useful when they create value markets.
REFERENCES
ARMSTRONG, M. and BARON, A. ( ) Strategic HRM: The key to improved business performance. London, CIPD.
BARNEY, J. (1991) Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of management, 17 (1).
BARNEY, J. and WRIGHT, P. (1998) On becoming a strategic partner: The role of HR in gaining competitive advantage. Human resource management, 37 (1).
BARNEY, J. and ZAJAC, E. (1994) Competitive organisational behaviour towards an organisationally based theory of competitive advantage. Strategic management journal, 15 (5).
BECKER, B. and HUSELID, M. (1998) High performance work systems and firm performance: A synthesis of research and managerial applications. Research in personnel and human resource management, 16.
BOXALL, P. (1996) The strategic HRM debate and the resource-based view of the firm. Human resource management journal, 6 (3).
BOXALL, P. and STEENEVELD, M. (1999) Human resource strategy and competitive advantage: A longitudinal study of engineering consultancies. Journal of management studies, 36 (4).
CONNER, K. (1991) A historical comparison of resource-based theory and five school of thought within industrial organisation economics: Do we have a new theory of the firm? Journal of management, 15 (5).
FAHY, J. (1999) Strategic marketing and the resource-based view of the firm. Marketing science review, [online] (10).
GOLDING, N. (2004)
MABEY, C., SALAMAN, G. and STOREY, J. (1998) Strategic human resource management. London, Sage publications.
MAHONEY, J. and PANDIAN, J. (1992) The resource-based view within the conversation of strategic management. Strategic management journal, 13 (5).
MARCHINGTON, M. and WILKINSON (2002) People management and development: Human resource management at work. UK, CIPD.
LADO, A and WILSON, M. (1994) Human resource systems and sustained competitive advantage: A competency-based perspective. Academy of management review, 19 (4).
PETERAF, M. (1993) The cornerstone of competitive advantage: A resource-based view. Strategic management journal, 14 (3).
PORTER, M. (1991) Towards a dynamic theory of strategy. Strategic management journal, 12 (2).
PRIEN, R. and BUTLER, J. (2001) Is the resource-based view a useful perspective for strategic management research? Academy of management review, 26 (1).
SCHULER, R. and JACKSON, S. (1999) Strategic human resource management. Oxford, Blackwell publishers.
TORRINGTON, D., HALL, L. and TAYLOR, S. (2002) Human resource management. UK, Pearson education.
WRIGHT, P., DUNFORD, B. and SNELL, S. (2001) Human resources and the resource-based view of the firm. Journal of management, 27.
Stoik Musah and Kenneth Songunuga writes from LBS,United Kingdom. Email stoik_joy@yahoo.com
Kehinde Songonuga,
LBS,East Midland.
United Kingdom.
The resource-based view to strategic human resource management (SHRM) focuses on the costly to copy attributes of the firm as the fundamental drivers of performance and competitive advantage (Cooner 1991). Linking to the understanding of the resource based view of the firm; Barney (1991) described competitive advantage as “when a firm is implementing a value creating strategy not simultaneously being implemented by any current or potential competitors”. The task is to maintain this competitive advantage in such a way that competitors’ efforts to replicate that advantage are frustrated and eventually cease. The resource-based view focuses on the promotion of sustained competitive advantage through the development of the human capital rather than merely aligning human resources to current strategic goals (Torrington et al 2002). This essay will show various ways on how the resource-based view of SHRM in organisations can contribute to enhanced organisational performance.
Human resources can provide competitive advantage for the business, as long as they are unique and can not be copied or substituted for by competing organisations, competitive success not coming from simply making choices in the present, but from building up distinctive capabilities over significant periods of time (Boxall 1996). Torrington et al (2002) argue that the focus is not just on the behaviour of the human resources, but on the skills, knowledge, attitudes and competencies which underpin this, and which have a more sustained impact on long-term survival than current behaviour. The central theme emerging in the SHRM resource-based literature is that privately held knowledge is a basic source of advantage in competition. The resource-based view generally addresses performance difference between firms using asymmetries in knowledge. A resource based theory of a firm thus entails a knowledge-based perspective; it blends concepts from organisational economics and strategic management (Barney 1991). According to this perspective, a firm’s ability to attain and keep profitable market positions depends on its ability to gain and defend advantageous positions in underlying resources important to production and distribution (Cooner 1991). Though the field of SHRM was not directly born of the resource-based view (RBV), it has clearly been instrumental to its development (Wright et al 2001). This was largely because of the RBV shifting emphasis in the strategy literature away from external factors towards internal firm resources as sources of competitive advantage (Wright et al 2001). The RBV view of competitive advantage differs from the traditional strategy paradigm in that its emphasis is on the link between strategy and the internal resources of the firm, and it is firm-focused, whereas the traditional strategic analysis concept has had an industry-environment focus (Schuler and Jackson 1999). Boxall (1996) argues that resources are not simply understood as assets in the formal accounting sense, but include any feature of the firm with value creating properties. This means that aspects of the business that are not formally owned by it, such as the talents and interactions of the people who work in it, are not ignored but come within the area of systematic interest. This justifies Barney (1991) argument that business excellence is not just about best- practice but about the intellectual capital and business intelligence to anticipate the future.
From the resource based view, in order for an organisation’s resources to contribute to enhanced organisational performance and maintain sustained competitive advantage, four criteria must be attributable to the resources: the resource must add positive value to the firm, the resource must be unique or rare among current and potential competitors, the resource must be inimitable and the organisation needs to ensure they are organised, this is also known as the VRIO framework (Golding 2004). Therefore, given resource heterogeneity, resource immobility and satisfaction of the requirements of value, rareness, inimitability, and organisation, an organisation’s resources can be a source of sustained competitive advantage (Schuler and Jackson 1999). Barney (1991) states that RBV makes it clear that firms can not expect to buy or purchase sustained competitive advantages, in that the advantages, if they exist, can only be found in the rare, inimitable, and non-substitutable resources already present in the organisation. Firstly, in order for human resources to exist as a sustained competitive advantage, they must provide value to the firm. Firms create value through either decreasing product/service costs or differentiating the product/service in a way that allows the firm to charge a premium price. Thus the ultimate goal of any HR executive is to create value through the HR function, but the first question that an HR executive must address is “How can the HR function aid either decreasing cost or increasing revenue?” (Barney and Wright 1998). Value to customers is an essential element of competitive advantage; therefore, for a resource to be a potential source of competitive advantage, it must be valuable or enable the creation of value (Fahy 1999). The HR function must be capable of making a difference in the organisation in the sense that it adds value in some way (Marchington and Wilkinson 2002). This is where the demand for labour is heterogeneous, and where supply for labour is heterogeneous-in other words where different firms require different competencies from each other and for different roles in the organisation, and where the supply of potential labour comprises individuals with different competencies (Torrington et al 2002). The suggestion of the RBV is that if HR wishes to be a “strategic partner”, they need to know which human resources contribute the most value that leads to sustainable competitive advantage in the business, as some human resources may provide greater influence for competitive advantage than others (Golding 2004). On this basis value is created by matching individual’s competencies with the requirements of the organisation and/or the job. Barney (1991) points that a resource must permit the firm to conceive of or implement strategies that improve its efficiency and effectiveness by meeting the needs of customers. This implies that though resources may meet other conditions, if they do not enable the creation of value, they are not a prospective source of advantage. The value of resources in an organisation is not enough to create sustainable competitive advantage, because if any other organisations hold the same value, then it will only provide competitive parity (Golding 2004). Therefore an organisation needs to consider the next level of the framework: rarity.
Rarity means there must be a shortage of these particular resources in the market to the extent that there are insufficient to go round all organisations (Marchington and Wilkinson 2002). The HR executive needs to consider how to develop rare characteristics of an organisation’s human resources to gain competitive advantage (Golding 2004). In some circumstances, the first organisation in an industry to implement an HR strategy can obtain competitive advantage over other firms (Barney 1991). If the HR strategy has value but no form of rarity, other organisations may develop an identical strategy or even something more unique, thereby displacing the first mover of sustained competitive advantage. A firm enjoys sustained competitive advantage when it is implementing a value-created strategy not simultaneously implemented by large numbers of other firms. If a particular valuable organisational resource is possessed by large numbers of firms, then each of these firms have the capacity of exploiting that resource in the same way, thereby implementing a common strategy that gives no one firm a competitive advantage (Barney 1991). Torrington et al (2002) argues that due to the normal distribution of ability, human resources with high ability levels are, by definition, rare. The goal of virtually all selection programs is to ensure that the organisation is hiring only the highest ability individuals. The issues then, are the validity of the selection system and whether or not the organisation is able to attract and retain those applicants considered to be of the highest quality (Torrington et al 2002). To observe that sustainable competitive advantage only accrue to firms that have valuable and rare resources is not to dismiss common organisational resources as unimportant. Instead, these valuable but common resources can help ensure a firm’s survival when they are exploited to create parity in an industry (Barney 1991). How rare a valuable firm resource must be in order to have the potential for generating competitive advantage is a difficult question. It is not difficult to see that if a firm’s valuable resources are absolutely unique among a set of competing firms, those resources will generate competitive advantage and have potential for creating sustainable competitive advantage (Barney 1991). Valuable and rare resources can create above normal profits for the firm in the short term; however, if other firms can imitate these qualities, then over time the characteristics will provide no more than competitive parity (Barney and Wright 1998).
In order for a resource to be considered a sustained competitive advantage and enhance organisation performance, human resources must be inimitable. The inability of competitors to duplicate resource endowments is a central element of the resource based view (Fahy 1999). Also competitors will not be able to duplicate the exact resource in question, as they will be unable to copy the unique historical conditions of the first firm. Wright et al (1992) use the concepts of unique historical conditions, casual ambiguity and social complexity to demonstrate the inimitability of competitive advantage stemming from human resources. Wright et al (1992) noted that this history is important as it will affect the behaviour of the human resource pool via the development of unique norms and culture. thus even if a competing firm recruited a group of individuals from a competitor they would still not be able to produce the same outcome in the new firm as the context is different. Causal ambiguity describes a situation where the causal source of competitive advantage is not easily identified and social complexity recognises that in many situations competitive advantage stems from unique social relationships that cannot be duplicated (Mahoney and Pandian 1992). Another reason that a firm’s resources may be inimitable is that they may be very complex social phenomena, beyond the ability of firms to systematically manage and influence (Peteraf 1993). When competitive advantages are based in such complex social phenomena, the ability of other firms to imitate these resources is significantly constrained. Lastly, to ensure the HR function can provide sustainable competitive advantage, the organisation has to be organised so that they can develop valuable resources that are rare and inimitable (Golding 2004). The organisation requires having in place the systems and practices that allow human resource characteristics to bear the fruit of their potential advantages. The question of organisation focuses attention on systems, as opposed to single HR practices (Barney and Wright 1998). This means a focus on horizontal integration of HR practices, rather than viewing each in isolation and the organisation ensuring that their policies and practices in the HR functional areas are coordinated and coherent, and not contradictory (Golding 2004).it is therefore clear that the employment of highly qualified and talented people can be useless without effective processes to ensure that they work well in combination and wish to contribute to organisational goals (Lado and Wilson 1994). According to the VRIO framework aspects of human resources that are valuable, rare, inimitable and appropriate HR systems in place could bring about sustainable competitive advantage.
Although RBV is of great use in helping to understand why differences exist between firms and consequently how certain organisations may be able to gain competitive advantage, it has notable potential limitations. Firstly it neglects the forces that lead to similarities in the same industry (Marchington and Wilkinson 2002). Barney and Zajac (1994) argue that RBV is tautological and does not generate testable hypotheses, recognising that most research applying the RBV has failed to test its fundamental concepts. Critics also point out that RBV focuses strongly on the internal context of the business. Some writers have suggested that the effectiveness of the resource-based view approach is inextricably linked to the external context of the firm (Golding 2004). There have been recognitions that the RBV approach provides more added value when the external environment is less predictable (Golding 2004). Priem and Butler (2001) argue that the static argument behind RBV is descriptive: it identifies generic characteristics of rent-generating resources without much attention to differing situations or resources comparisons. How the organisational resources generate sustainable rent is still not known other than through their heterogeneity. Although applications of RBV has taken variety of forms, ranging from high performance work systems and stocks of talent, to fit between employee skills and strategy it has employed a common underlying logic: human resource activities are thought to lead to the development of a skilled workforce and one that engages in functional behaviour for the firm, thus forming a source of competitive advantage (Wright et al 2001). Becker and Huselid (1998) note that this results in higher performance, which translates into increased profitability for the organisation. While this theoretical story is appealing, Wright et al (2001) notes that it is important to note that most of the empirical studies assess only two variables: HR practices and performance. While establishing such a relationship provides empirical evidence for the potential value of HR to firms, it fails to adequately test the RBV in two important ways (Wright et al 2001). First, no attempt has yet been made to empirically assess the validity of the proposition that SHRM practices are casually ambiguous, nor whether they are actually difficult to imitate. Boxall and Steeneveld (1999) argue that while instinctively obvious and possibly supported by subjective data, the field lacks verifiable quantitative data to support these declarations. That virtually anything associated with the organisation can be a resource suggest that prescriptions of dealing in certain ways with certain categories of resources might be operationally valid, whereas other categories of resources might be inherently difficult to measure and manipulate, one example of a resource that might be difficult to measure is tacit knowledge (Lado and Wilson 1994). Some have argued for tacit knowledge-that understanding gained from experience but that cannot be expressed to another person and is unknown to oneself-as a source of competitive advantage (Lado and Wilson 1994). Lado and Wilson (1994) argue that this may be descriptively correct, but it is likely to be quite difficult for practitioners to effectively manipulate that which is inherently unknowable. Mabey et al (1998) argues that in various researches carried out, there has been no strong statistical correlation between HR programmes supported by senior management and company performance. Other authors have anticipated this evidence as confirmation that managerial policies have no significant impact on an organisation’s economic performance (Mabey et al 1998). Priem and Butler (2001) also noted that in RBV studies, researchers sometimes take a frequently research strategy subject area, relabel the independent variables as “resource” and the dependent variables as “competitive advantage” and use measures common to much cross-sectional strategy research as operationalization. Together, these issues suggest that the current high level of abstraction found in the static approach to the RBV might be one thing that could limit its usefulness for strategy (Priem and Butler 2001).
In a response to criticism from the resource-based theorists, Porter(1991) argues that resources are not valuable in and of themselves, but because they allow organisations to perform activities that create advantages in particular markets, add that it seems safe to suggest, however, that what the resource-based view has stimulated is a re-balancing of the literature on strategy in a way that stresses the strategic significance of internal resources and capabilities and their historical development. Boxall (1996) argues that those organisations which combine high levels of competence in multiple modes of strategy making appear to be the highest performers, and not only those organisations with astute leadership at the top but those that can combine this strength with deep employee involvement in strategic decision-making appear to be more effective. In this way the resource based view suggest an integration of theory on strategy process and strategic content. (Boxall 1996). RBV can provide a strong base for strategic HRM. The aim of RBV is to improve resource capacity-achieving strategic fit between resources and opportunities and also obtaining added value from the effective deployment of resources (Peteraf 1993). The RBV theory provides a rationale for strategic HRM and in line with intellectual capital theory, RB theory emphasises that investment in people add to their value to the firm (Armstong and Baron 2002).
The resource-based approach provides a framework for examining the pool of human resources that may be either able or unable to carry out a given strategy during the formulation phase of SHRM. Thus the resource-based view may demonstrate the fact that strategies are not universally implementable, but are contingent on having the human resource base necessary to implement them. RBV focuses on the analysis of internal strengths and weaknesses, paying particular attention to the ways in which firms can develop valuable resources and erect barriers to imitation of them. It is however, without conceptual weaknesses. Strategy analysts should remember that the firm exist in environments: resources are not ends in themselves but are useful when they create value markets.
REFERENCES
ARMSTRONG, M. and BARON, A. ( ) Strategic HRM: The key to improved business performance. London, CIPD.
BARNEY, J. (1991) Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of management, 17 (1).
BARNEY, J. and WRIGHT, P. (1998) On becoming a strategic partner: The role of HR in gaining competitive advantage. Human resource management, 37 (1).
BARNEY, J. and ZAJAC, E. (1994) Competitive organisational behaviour towards an organisationally based theory of competitive advantage. Strategic management journal, 15 (5).
BECKER, B. and HUSELID, M. (1998) High performance work systems and firm performance: A synthesis of research and managerial applications. Research in personnel and human resource management, 16.
BOXALL, P. (1996) The strategic HRM debate and the resource-based view of the firm. Human resource management journal, 6 (3).
BOXALL, P. and STEENEVELD, M. (1999) Human resource strategy and competitive advantage: A longitudinal study of engineering consultancies. Journal of management studies, 36 (4).
CONNER, K. (1991) A historical comparison of resource-based theory and five school of thought within industrial organisation economics: Do we have a new theory of the firm? Journal of management, 15 (5).
FAHY, J. (1999) Strategic marketing and the resource-based view of the firm. Marketing science review, [online] (10).
GOLDING, N. (2004)
MABEY, C., SALAMAN, G. and STOREY, J. (1998) Strategic human resource management. London, Sage publications.
MAHONEY, J. and PANDIAN, J. (1992) The resource-based view within the conversation of strategic management. Strategic management journal, 13 (5).
MARCHINGTON, M. and WILKINSON (2002) People management and development: Human resource management at work. UK, CIPD.
LADO, A and WILSON, M. (1994) Human resource systems and sustained competitive advantage: A competency-based perspective. Academy of management review, 19 (4).
PETERAF, M. (1993) The cornerstone of competitive advantage: A resource-based view. Strategic management journal, 14 (3).
PORTER, M. (1991) Towards a dynamic theory of strategy. Strategic management journal, 12 (2).
PRIEN, R. and BUTLER, J. (2001) Is the resource-based view a useful perspective for strategic management research? Academy of management review, 26 (1).
SCHULER, R. and JACKSON, S. (1999) Strategic human resource management. Oxford, Blackwell publishers.
TORRINGTON, D., HALL, L. and TAYLOR, S. (2002) Human resource management. UK, Pearson education.
WRIGHT, P., DUNFORD, B. and SNELL, S. (2001) Human resources and the resource-based view of the firm. Journal of management, 27.
Stoik Musah and Kenneth Songunuga writes from LBS,United Kingdom. Email stoik_joy@yahoo.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)