Employees are the asset of every organization. They help in building up the business with hard work and dedication. In return, the management appreciates and rewards the performances of the employees. In order to achieve progress, an organization may recruit more employees to attend the management and production activities. Sometimes, to facilitate the expansion of the business and physical convenience a company may relocate itself while accommodating the increased number of employees.
The present company namely, Parlexceltron Ltd was started ten years ago. Since its inception the Managing director, Jack Stevens and his wife Kate Stevens have strived very hard to make the company reach new heights. Initially, they had only 15 employees, but gradually more workers were recruited and now it has got 106 employees to boast of (Hollings 2006& 2009).
Parlexceltron Ltd is a medium-sized family-owned enterprise that manufactures micro chipboards for the consumer sector. They are doing excellent business in the country as well as in the international markets. Expansion was inevitable for them, and therefore, they tried to shift the plant to another location. But the move was opposed by the employees. The management was in a dilemma and could not ascertain the reason for the opposition. For, the shifting was initiated only to safeguard the interests of the employees (Hollings 2006& 2009).
After four years, the company was able to achieve high reputation in terms of quality, good delivery and customer service. Considering the increase in number of customers it was necessary for Jack Stevens to think of expansion. Therefore, the company moved into a new industrial estate with more units and employees. Because of this the production increased by 15% (Hollings 2006& 2009).
Kate provided modern infrastructure for the benefit of the employees and that was the main reason for the increase in productivity. Their two sons, Simon and Martin also entered the business, and the company thrived a lot. Simon studied Business Management and looked after the marketing and sales division of the company in the capacity of Commercial Director, whereas Martin chose to handle the machine and equipments of the company. When Martin joined the company he was not at all welcomed by the employees who were fond of the production manager Jones. To overcome this crisis Kate and Simon decided to intervene (Hollings 2006& 2009).
A German based company now approached Parlexceltron for the supply of micro chips. And to cater their needs the management took the decision to diversify the business. But Jones opposed the move stating that the employees were working to their full capacity and cannot take further workload. Moreover, the employees were dissatisfied with the pay difference as they feared redundancies if the company moved to anew production unit. To overcome the stalemate, the management has to take bold steps on its own without losing the support of the employees and at the same time motivating them to work in the new plant location (Hollings 2006& 2009).
Options before Parlexceltron
The management has to decide on a future course of action so that production is not interrupted. The production manager Jones can talk to the employees as they consider him their leader and he can become the best person to resolve the employee issues. He can address the problems of the employees and communicate the same to the management to get them resolved. The management needs to work out a feasible pay structure and has to overcome the redundancies by taking the employees into confidence and convincing them about the advantages of shifting the plant to another location. This can be done if a good H.R. Manager is hired by the company who can interact with the employees with a positive effect (Hollings 2006& 2009).
In this case it can be seen that there is a change in the workplace and it is happening fast and quite often in the organization. It is this change that calls for intervention to take up new challenges, and the H.R. managers do know how to ease the difficulty of such changes. HR manager’s skill in managing a change is directly proportional to the way he deals with the reactive and proactive responses (Simmering, 2010).
Changes are of two types. The first one is proactive and the other is reactive. Proactive change occurs when a company tries to change the working environment. The company that applies a proactive approach actually prevents the company from becoming a prey to future threats. Reactive change happens when an organization applies a change in the existing pattern of practices after confronting with certain threats from the work place and business administrations. The management reacts to these changes and that is why it is called reactive change (Simmering, 2010).
Defining Business Model
In the study of Rappa (2003) a business model is defined as “the method of doing business by which a company can sustain itself”. The idea of business model is applicable to all organizations. Even though the terms are used frequently by academicians and H.R. managers no in depth studies are done in this area so far (Weill et al, 2004).
There are different theoretical models of change which describe how an organization can alter the business practices and structure so that it can improve in the business conducts. Different organizations adopt change models according to their needs and by adopting them they are able to become more successful (Simmering, 2010).
Lewin’s three-step model for change
According to Swinton (n.d), Kurt Lewin, who is a well known social psychologist, is the first one to develop the three-step model on the concept of force field analysis. His model is very simple and effective. The driving and resisting forces of a change are addressed effectively if the driving forces are allowed to subdue the resisting forces while change occurs. Managers must strictly support change to overcome resistance from the employees (Simmering, 2010).
Different models of change:
Bullock and Batten’s model
This change model was developed by R.J. Bullock and D. Batten. They use exploration, planning and action along with integration in planning a change in the conduct of an organization. This model has proved successful for bringing changes in a company. The elements of exploration, planning and action are supported by integration and all these are done in different stages to draw the required change (Simmering, 2010).
Eight steps model of change was the brain child of John P. Kotter. According to him every company has to do the task of eight steps to implement the change. These eight steps are adopted to sustain urgency, coalition, vision and strategy in the organization (Simmering, 2010).
The mathematical equation of Beckhard and Harris
In this model the element of change is illustrated in the form of a mathematical equation. If a change is to happen the cost of change is exhibited in the form of (X) which should be surpassed by dissatisfaction to reach a status quo framed as (A). Here the proposed change is considered to be (B) and the feasibility of the change as (D). Resistance to change is originated when employees are dissatisfied (Simmering, 2010).
According to Bratton & Gold (1999) Guest model determines the operational field of HRM and categorizes the inputs and outputs. This model is applied for designing the activity roles of HR managers to amalgamate it with normative models of strategic integration, commitment, quality and flexibility.
Evolution of HR strategy and Personnel Management
According to (Strategic Human Resources Practices, 2010), the development and implementation HR strategy are akin to the aims of the organization. It is matched to the competencies of the organization and imparts tangible results for the employees, customers and stakeholders. When the business profile is changed, corresponding innovations will begin in the management side, which in turn will develop positive relationship with customers, suppliers, competitors etc. These changes must interalia reflect in shifting roles and responsibilities for human resources (Coates, n.d.).
The concept of HR management was introduced by the Harvard Business School three decades ago. Prior to it, the companies were engaged in determining the feasibility of naming the concept as personnel management or employment department. And in early 1920s the concept was fondly christened as ‘time office’ or ‘welfare department’. Whatever it is, the concept is evolved in a systematic way and the HR management activities are deciding factors in establishing collective employee relationships (Human resource management in an expanding Europe, n.d.).
Role of HR Managers in Organizational progress
Merlevede (2005) confirms that HR Management will tend to align the HR tools according to the culture and business strategy of a company in relation to the motivational characteristics of the employee. In the view of (Price, 2007) HRM concept means a vague picture for many people. Teamwork together with cooperation between the employees constitutes value of a company as per Schein (2009).
Strategic HR management is the linking of human resource activities with the company objects to satiate improvement of performance, says Bratton (n.d.). But in the study of Tannir (2007) HR managers are considered as the guardian angels of an organization. However, Monks & Maclean (2001) oppose the argument by stating that HR and business strategy alignment are not at all necessary in the logical and sequential way of preparing a business model. However, Hellor (2009) opines that Performance Matrix determines the potential of the employees and HR managers can improve such potentials. It is the duty of HRM to act on the staffing requirements and to take decisions such as to hire them or to recruit them (McNamara, n.d.).
If the employees do not co-operate with the management in the production process it will become increasingly difficult for them to meet the demands of their clients. The business will suffer in the long run and hence they cannot afford to lose the employees who are already trained (Hollings 2006& 2009).
A change is brought for the betterment of the management, the employees and the business. If the change fails to work, it means the change model adopted is inappropriate for the organization and has to be replaced with a better one that addresses the needs of the organization and its employees. If the employees are satisfied the organization will achieve better results. Otherwise, the company may perish. This is why it is imperative that the management takes the employees into confidence and motivates them to work better (Hollings 2006& 2009).
Bratton, J., & Gold, J., 1999. Human Resource Management: Theory and Practice, Macmillan Press, London.
Coates, F.J., (n.d.) The HR Implications of Emerging Business Models, Coates & Jarratt, Inc. Web.
Heller, R., 2009. Web.
Hollings, A., 2006 & 2009. Partexceltron Ltd., Sustaining Success or Facing Failure.
Human resource management in an expanding Europe (2010) FedEE Services Ltd. Web.
McNamara, C., (n.d.). Human Resource Management (and Talent Management), Free Management Library. Web.
Merlevede, P.E.C., 2005. Human Resources Management – An Integral Vision. Web.
Monks, K., & McKackin, J., 2001. Designing and aligning an HR system. Human Resource Management, 11(2), pp. 57–72
Price, A., 2007. Defining Human Resource Management. HRM Guide Network contributors. Web.
Rappa, M., 2003. Managing the Digital Enterprise: Business Models on the Web. Web.
Schein, E. H., 2009. Organizational Culture and Leadership. Recklies Management Project GmbH. Web.
Simmering, M.J., 2010. Reactive Vs. Proactive Change, Encyclopedia of Business, 2nd ed. Web.
Strategic Human Resources Practices (2010) eCornell. Web.
Swinton, L., (n.d.) Kurt Lewin’s Force Field Analysis: Decision Making Made Easy. Web.
Tannir, M., 2007. Challenges of Human Resources Management in The 21st Century. Web.
Weill, P., Malone, T.W., D’Urso, V.T., Herman, G., & Woener, S., 2004. Do Some Business Models Perform Better than Others? A Study of the 1000 Largest US Firms. Web.